Debates and Proceedings
of the
First Constitutional Convention
of West Virginia

December 9, 1861

The Convention was opened with prayer by Rev. Gideon Martin, of the M. E. Church.

Journal read and approved.

MR. DERING. Mr. President, I hold in my hand a petition signed by a
large number of very respectable and loyal citizens of my county;
and although the Convention has acted on the subject matter of the
petition and granted the prayer of the petitioners, yet, sir, I
hold the right of petition so sacred that I desire it to be read
and laid on the table.

The
petition was read as follows:

"We, the
undersigned, citizens of Monongalia county, pray the Convention to
have a provision engrafted in the Constitution for our new State
which will debar all traitors from the privilege of voting, until
pardoned by the Government of the United States, and then put them
on probation, the same as foreigners, by law, so far as voting is
concerned; and we consider all persons traitors who have
voluntarily taken up arms against the government of the United
States, or abetted in bringing on this deplorable
rebellion."

(Signed)
A. MILLER and others.

THE
PRESIDENT. When the Convention adjourned on Saturday, it had
under consideration the report of the Committee on
Boundary.

MR.
STUART of Doddridge. Mr. President, I believe the first
resolution, as amended, was adopted. The next business in order, I
presume, is the second resolution. I move the Convention now take
it up for consideration.

MR.
BATTELLE. Mr. President, allow me to suggest sir, if it would
not be as well to permit this report to lie on the table for the
present. We have been driving at it for several days, and perhaps
we could make more rapid headway with something else; and if we
could, it would be very desirable, I conceive, to let this remain
on the table for the present.

THE
PRESIDENT. The Chair would suggest that the resolution is not
up yet. The motion -

MR.
BATTELLE. Is to take it up.

THE
PRESIDENT. It would perhaps be better to make a motion to pass
by the second resolution.

MR.
BATTELLE. I was speaking to that very proposition - whether the
Convention should now take up the report of the Committee on
Boundary. Am I in order? (Pausing for reply but receiving none,
resuming.) I was speaking to the question whether the Convention
should now take up the report of the Committee on Boundaries. Am I
in error in supposing that would be proper?

THE
PRESIDENT. The motion would be proper to pass by the report of
the committee, or to pass by any of its resolutions.

MR.
BATTELLE. Very well, sir, I will make then that motion, as a
substitute for the motion of the gentleman from Doddridge, to pass
by for the present the report of the Committee on Boundaries. I do
not know that I need include in my motion the taking up of any
other subject for consideration; but I would suggest that we have
two reports that might be properly considered now, either the
report of the Committee on Fundamental and General Provisions or
the report of the Committee on the Executive Department. I merely
make the suggestion, Mr. President, without any reference to the
merits of the proposition contained yet unacted upon in the report
of the Committee on Boundary; but because I suppose we may in the
end gain time by permitting this report to lie for the time. The
country is making history very fast, sir, now-a-days. There may be
some difficulties removed out of our way in reference to this very
question of boundary.

I make
that motion: that the Convention pass by for the present the report
of the Committee on Boundary.

MR.
STUART of Doddridge. I hope it will not be the pleasure of the
Convention to pass by as the gentleman's amendment suggests. It is
necessary, gentlemen, that this question should be now settled in
order to let other committees make their reports. The Committee on
the Legislative Department and the Committee on the Judiciary
cannot report until the boundaries are settled and determined upon.
We have got the question now up; and I cannot see that we can gain
any more light; and as we have the subject up for discussion
already, the sooner we settle this question the sooner the other
committees will be able to report to this body. It does strike me
that this is the first step we should take: to settle this question
of boundary. I can see nothing to be gained by passing it by, but
everything to lose. The question is now up before us, under
discussion; the attention of members has been called to it; we have
been engaged on it, thinking about it. That would be one reason;
and the other reason has been assigned: that the committees are
waiting for the settlement of this question. And I hope it will now
be settled before we pass it by.

MR.
STEVENSON of Wood. Mr. President, I would suggest to the
gentleman from Ohio that he can accomplish the purpose of his
resolution and those who agree with him by voting against taking up
the report at the present time. That of course would postpone
it.

MR.
BATTELLE. I modified my proposition at the suggestion of the
Chair; and I believe the suggestion was to consider simply the
proposition of the gentleman from Doddridge. I understood the
suggestion of the Chair to be that -

THE
PRESIDENT. Does the gentleman withdraw his amendment then, to
allow the question to be on the motion to take up?

MR.
BATTELLE. I do not, sir.

MR.
BROWN of Kanawha. We have had the action of the Convention
delayed already for the want of a determination of this very
question before the Convention now. We have found, in fact, that
the action of the Legislative Committee was suspended and the
report upon this question of boundary brought in, so that the other
committees might act. To leave this question and take up something
else would be hopping from one thing to another in a way that we
would never attain an end. If circumstances shall write "history"
that shall change our action then we may modify it when that
"history" shall have been written. I know what "history" the
gentleman alludes to; but it seems to me we should pursue our
course and let "history" take its way.

MR.
BATTELLE. I am not tenacious. I have no special object to gain.
The proposition which I submitted, I offered in good faith and
frankly with the view that the Convention would gain time by
adopting it. I think there is nothing wrong in the proposition. It
will not hinder the action of the Convention. Though they may not
be ready to act on the report of the Judiciary Committee, there are
other reports on which they can act without let or hindrance by the
boundary question. The report of the Executive Committee would have
nothing to do with it. The principles governing the executive
department will be identically the same whether we do or do not
include additional territory. So in reference to the unfinished
report of the Committee on Fundamental and General Provisions.
There is abundance to do in which the Convention can make progress
without this report; and my proposition is with a view that this
question need not be embarrassed at all by delay, and the minds of
the members may meanwhile become more clearly convinced as to their
duty one way or the other.

The motion
made by Mr. Battelle, to pass by, was not agreed to; and the motion
made by Mr. Stuart of Doddridge, to take up the report prevailed,
and the consideration of the report was resumed.

The second
resolution was reported as follows:

"RESOLVED,
That the district comprising the counties of Craig, Giles, Bland,
Tazewell, Russell, Lee, and Scott shall be included in and
constitute part of the proposed new State, provided a majority of
the votes cast within the said district, at elections to be held
for the purpose on the third Thursday in April, in the year 1862,
and a majority of the said counties, are in favor of the adoption
of the Constitution, to be submitted to this
Convention."

MR.
BROWN of Kanawha. I move that the counties of Wise and Buchanan
be added to that list.

MR. VAN
WINKLE. It will be remembered, sir, that there was an
understanding of that kind, when they were stricken from the first
table, they would be inserted in the second; and I presume the
motion of the gentleman from Kanawha is merely to place them in
there as if they had been so reported and that they be subject to
any motion that may relate to them and others included with them.
It can be done, sir, by general understanding, I suppose, that
these counties are in this resolution as if originally so
reported.

THE
PRESIDENT. The object of the gentleman from Wood then is to
dispense with the necessity of a vote?

MR. VAN
WINKLE. Yes, sir, I ask the general consent of the Convention,
to simplify the matter, that the counties of Wise and Buchanan be
included in the second resolution of the report as if originally so
reported, it having been the understanding that they should be
taken out of the one and included in the other. That will not
hinder any motion that may hereafter be made in regard to
them.

MR.
PRESIDENT. Without objection that will be taken as the sense of
the Convention.

The
question then will be on the adoption of the resolution.

MR.
STEVENSON of Wood. Mr. President, I wish to state as briefly as
I can a few general objections which I have to the passage of this
resolution and to embracing the counties named in it; and my
remarks may apply to the counties named in the fourth resolution
also, as I think they all involve the same principle.

The legal
questions arising out of this matter have been discussed here
already at great length and with ability. I do not now, sir,
propose to say anything, even if I were able to do so, on that
portion of the subject; but, sir, I wish to take another, and, as
it seems to me, an equally important view of this case. I propose,
sir, to examine it as a practical question. I propose to examine it
just as we would examine any one of the ordinary business
transactions of everyday life - just as if we were going to add
some acres to our farms, or introduce a number of new partners into
our business; for I contend, sir, the matter of utility is after
all to settle this question. If, sir, you could extend the
boundaries of this new State and yet violate no principle of law
involved in the case - if you could do it without acting in bad
faith to any compact that had heretofore been entered into - I say
if you could without violating a principle of law, extend the
boundaries of this new State from the Ohio river to the Blue Ridge
mountains, you would inflict a serious if not fatal injury on this
whole new State movement, unless you can satisfy this Convention
that the geographical position of these counties proposed to be
taken in now by the remaining resolutions, the industrial and
social habits of their people and their trade and commercial
intercourse are such as to make a union with them desirable,
profitable and lasting.

Now, sir,
if I understand this report, it proposes to go beyond anything that
"was claimed here in the discussion on Saturday. The discussion
then seemed to involve the argument - and it had a good deal of
force in it I am willing to admit - that the interest and safety of
this new State required that it should possess all the territory up
to that great natural breast-work, the Alleghany mountains, behind
which gentlemen tell us our people were to take refuge in time of
war and public danger. But now, sir, it is proposed to extend our
outposts far beyond the range of these mountain barriers into the
very heart of - I must say, and I can use no milder term - an
unfriendly country. We propose now to make a sort of "reconnoisance
in force" to the very top of the Blue Ridge mountains. If I
understand this report, sir, it carries us over the Alleghany
mountains. It embraces all the counties lying around the eastern
base of those mountains from the Maryland line, down to the lines
of Kentucky and Tennessee; and from the Maryland line, again, down
to the middle, or beyond the middle of the valley - all the
counties clean across to the top of, or at least somewhere on the
Blue mountain Ridge - some twenty-five counties. I know, sir, some
of those counties lying along down by the Tennessee and Kentucky
line may be said to be on the western slope of the mountains, or
rather in the mountains; but it does seem to me that they are
almost as inaccessible to us as the counties that are properly
within the limits of the valley. Now, sir, here are twenty-five
counties we propose to take in, having according to the tables
presented here a population of over half a million or nearly double
the population that is to be found in the thirty-nine counties
originally reported by the ordinance which called this Convention
together. Now, sir, I am willing to admit that at first sight there
seems to be, and I suppose there is, a strong temptation to take in
this valley region. I know, sir, that the "sweet fields" that are
spread out "in living green" in this beautiful valley of Virginia
are desirable, but let me say to this Convention that if we
organize a compact State now, having a people whose interests,
whose feelings and whose opinions are alike, and put that State in
successful operation - put all the state machinery to work - in the
process of time, if this valley country is to come to us, it will
come in the natural order of events. It seems to me, now, sir, if
the intention is to grasp it prematurely, and before either they or
we are ready, that we will meet with a disappointment something
like that of the man in the fable who ripped up goose that laid the
golden eggs.

The first
objection, sir, it seems to me against the addition of these
counties is to be found in this fact, that their geographical
position is such that for a long period of time - for several
generations - we can have but little commercial intercourse, or
communication otherwise, with the people of that valley region, or
they with us. I do not pretend to say the time will never come when
we will trade with these people and have sympathies and interests
that will be more alike than at present; but I say, sir, that time
is not the present. I know that the ingenuity of man, the skill of
the civil engineer, and the enterprise of the American people may
overcome even such an obstacle as that of the towering mountains of
the Alleghany; but, sir, you will discover that now the trade of
these people, the great bulk of their trade - and they have an
immense trade, amounting to many millions of dollars every year -
is with the people of eastern Virginia, and with the people south,
some of it going to the State of Maryland; because they are united
with these people by great public highways. A number of railroads
pass through or over the mountain ridges to the eastern side of the
Blue Ridge; and there they are met with railroads at almost every
convenient point, because, if you will look you will discover that
eastern Virginia is so covered over with internal improvements -
and by the way, you helped to build them, particularly the
railroads - that it resembles a spider's web. There is a perfect
net-work of railroads there, many of them running up to such
convenient distances on the eastern side of the Blue Ridge as to
connect with the people of this valley country. Now, upon these
railroads the products of this country, their fabrics of every
kind, and their merchandise of every description, are carried
safely and swiftly and cheaply to the great centers of trade in
eastern Virginia and at the extreme South. They sell, therefore,
their products into that country. Not only do they sell their
merchandise, the products of their farms or workshops, but they
make their purchases there; and they make large purchases there.
You will see from this, sir, that the interests of this people are
identified with the interests of a people who are hostile to this
new State movement; not only hostile to this new State project, but
in open rebellion (and sympathising with those who are) for the
very destruction of this whole government. The sources of their
wealth, then, are there; and I think I may be permitted to say in
the language of Scripture, that "where their treasures are, there
will their hearts be also."

Well, now,
sir, I will just say here in general terms that the social
institutions of that valley country, and the opinions of their
people upon them, and the institutions of our people, their habits
and kind of industry, and their opinions on them, are just as
different and as dissimilar as is the natural geography of the two
sections. Now, sir, it seems to me that that is an insurmountable
objection - at least it is at present in my mind - to the addition
of those counties to the new State.

But, now,
sir, there is another matter that I wish to consider here, but
before I do that just allow me to say this, that if I have got a
correct statement of this matter so far, if this valley country is
included with us in this new State, it will inevitably lead to a
conflict of interests - just the same war of interests we have
always had. Now, do not you see that each section will undertake to
control the legislation of this new State and dictate its policy?
Well, now, sir, the valley counties have a greater unity of
interests than we have, and they have a preponderance of population
as I have already shown you; and as a matter of course they will
dictate the legislation and policy of this new State. How will they
do that? Why, sir, to build up their own institutions and foster
their own commerce; to extend the limits of their own trade; to
enrich their own people; and the people upon the West slope of the
mountains will be taxed as usual to help them. Now, sir, what will
the result be? Why, it will have but one result, and that will be
to cripple, to hobble and handcuff this new State in every step of
its progress.

Now, there
is another consideration. It was alluded to here by, I think, the
gentleman from Preston, on Saturday, and that is this: that in a
majority of the counties proposed to be taken in here, and probably
in all of the counties - I do not know how that is - but there
seems to be hardly any dispute that the sentiment of a majority of
the counties altogether - and in some it is almost unanimous - is
against the new State movement, as well as in sympathy with and in
many cases giving actual assistance of men and money for the
prosecution of this war to overturn the government of which we must
form a part. Now, sir, I say for one that I am not of that class
alluded to here, nor do I believe there is any man in this
Convention who favors the extreme doctrine of exterminating
secessionists. If there is any feeling, sir, I should rather it
would be on the side of clemency; for I believe, with the great
Poet of nature, that

"The
quality of mercy is not strained;
It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven
Upon the place beneath: it is twice blessed;
It blesseth him that gives, and him that takes:
Tis mightiest in the mightiest: it becomes
The throned monarch better than his crown."

But while
I agree to that sentiment, sir, I agree to that other sentiment,
that this new State, and the general government of which it must
form a part, owes it to its own existence and to its loyal citizens
to execute force enough to crush out this rebellion in the shortest
time possible; and it is particularly the duty of this Convention,
while they do not favor the doctrine of exterminating secessionists
that they should be very careful not to put secessionists in a
position that they can exterminate us.

Now, sir,
the gentleman from Preston exhibited the statistics here; and that
argument has not yet been answered, I believe: that so strong was
that element of secession, of opposition to this new State, that if
those counties were added they would dictate the policy of this new
State - dictate the kind of legislation that should be made; and as
a matter of course, shape the destiny of this new State hereafter.
Now, supposing it to be an extreme case that they can not elect
their Governor - supposing they cannot do that - suppose they could
not elect a man actually opposed to this new State movement or who
actually favored this rebellion. I think you will all admit one
thing and that is this, that in the local offices in those
particular districts or counties where that element predominates,
where it enforces itself on public opinion and that public opinion
becomes a part of it, they will control all the county and State
offices and all the other places of honor or public trust within
the limits of those counties. Now, sir, what condition of things
have you there? Why, sir, every office, from the smallest precinct
office up to the highest in the district or county - to at least
the majority of those offices - are to have men in them who are
spies upon the new State and spies upon the general government. You
would exhibit the spectacle of a number of counties in the limits
of this new State, while they professed to be members of it, that
were in successful or open rebellion against its authority. Now,
sir, I alluded here the other day - and I intend simply to allude
to it now - to another matter that is well worth considering here.
If we intend to make this new State, sir, what we have been telling
the people it ought to be, and what it will be if we are judicious
and cautious in giving it an organic law - if it is ever to become
a competitor with the States of Pennsylvania and Ohio or other
states that are connected with it by the sympathies of their
people, their commerce and institutions, we must have a people and
population who are to settle up the wild and waste lands of this
new State of ours, and who will bring capital and energy and
industry to develop its great natural resources; because you can
never have a prosperous State without these. And, sir, I believe
that every gentleman present will agree with me - or nearly every
one - in reference to this remark. I know, sir, there is a class of
men, we find them in every community, and in this community - who
have a kind of dread of anything like what they call innovation.
Why, sir, the sight of a steamboat carrying a dozen families with
their household furniture and agricultural implements almost puts
them into spasms. They do not like to see any addition to the
population. Their ideas, sir, are with the past; and they are not
the men, it seems to me, calculated to build up and make this a
prosperous State. They do not believe in manufactories (in large
ones); they do not believe in the circulation of a liberal
literature; in the freedom of the press or the freedom of speech -
in anything of this kind. But, sir, many of them believe just as
firmly (almost) as that they have an existence that it is the
certain forerunner of bad luck if they happen to see the new moon
over the wrong shoulder.

Now, sir,
I repeat it, if the great natural wealth which lies within the
boundaries of this new State, and we are to have a population - an
industrious and enterprising population who will aid in the
development of that wealth and make it useful to bring in revenues
to the State and enrich it, that you must shape your organic law in
such a way as will invite that capital and invite that labor. Now,
I do not say you should do anything to injure the people of the new
State; I do not say we should adopt anything that would conflict
with their true interests; but I do say that we should incorporate
such features in this Constitution that while they will be
beneficial to our people, they will be an invitation to that class
of people to whom I refer. Now, sir, I ask the question, simply
here, and I do not intend to answer it - where is this capital and
where are these people to come from? I say nothing against the
people here of our own country. I believe, if I know myself, I am
as much devoted to their welfare as any person can be. They are
just as moral, as industrious, as enterprising as any other people
placed in similar circumstances; but what I do say is that we have
enough of these people; we want a larger population and a greater
abundance of capital to put this new State in the pathway of
progress and make it successfully vital to those States on its
borders. Now, sir, you can answer that question; and when you have
determined the source from which this capital is to flow in - the
source whence this immigration of population - then I say it would
be a wise policy to shape the organic law of tills State so as to
hold out inducements to that class of people. I do not think you
can do it by adding to this new State these valley counties. If you
can I shall willingly listen to the argument that may be urged in
favor of their addition; but from all the examination I have been
enabled to bestow on this subject, it does seem to me that the
result of the annexation or the addition of these counties will not
only be to cripple and to hobble the people here as they always
have been in their business, in matters of taxation and in their
industry; but it will also have the effect from the way the policy
will necessarily be shaped by the preponderance given to it by the
addition of these counties, to shut out, as it has heretofore, the
capital and population from those very places from which we desire
to receive them.

I will say
here again that there is one other matter to be considered: in
making this Constitution, we must be careful not only to make a
Constitution that will meet with favor amongst our own people - for
that is a very important matter you will admit - but we must make a
Constitution that will meet with favor, if possible with little
discussion in our own legislature; and more than that, if we are to
be successful in the establishment of this new State, we must make
a Constitution that will command a majority of the votes of both
Houses of Congress and meet with the approval of the President of
the United States.

Now, sir,
these are some of the considerations which will induce me to vote
against the adoption of the second and fourth resolutions, or
embracing the counties within them. I shall not say, sir, that I
shall not vote for some of the counties in the third resolution;
but will reserve my judgment on that matter until their claims are
properly canvassed before this Convention.

MR.
STUART of Doddridge. Mr. President, I cannot reconcile the
gentleman's argument with any other principle than that he lost
sight of the resolution before this body. The gentleman set out
with his argument that we are attempting to include a portion of
people here that is opposed to our government and opposed to the
organization of a new State here. Now, sir, if that is a fact the
resolution squarely and fairly submits the question to this people;
and the argument of the gentleman that we are embracing, or
attempting to, a people that is not with us in feeling does not
hold good for we do not propose to do any such thing; we do not
propose to include this people against their votes and sentiments
and will; but it simply submits the question to them whether or not
they want to be a part and parcel of the State of West Virginia.
Now, sir, there is not one word in the resolution that goes to
include those people against their will and consent. Now, sir, if
they vote - a majority of them vote to come into the State of West
Virginia, why that refutes the argument of the gentleman itself.
People who are better acquainted with their circumstances, their
wishes and desires than he or I will pass upon this question and
tell us whether they want to come or not. Now, does not that settle
the question at once? Then the argument that we are attempting to
include a people here who are against us in sentiment and interest
- against the new State movement - goes for nothing; because we
simply propose to ask these people to indicate their
wishes.

Another
view the gentleman took of it, and another objection he had to it,
was that we would be including a people here that would govern us
in future legislation - that we would be tied down and they would
rule and control the State of West Virginia. Now, sir, it does seem
to me the gentleman did not look at the statistics. He certainly
did not inform himself on this point. I find in the thirty-nine
counties a white population in round numbers of 272,000. I find,
sir, in Table B. including the counties proposed to be admitted by
the resolution now before the Convention, a white population of
48,539. Can it be argued here for a single moment, if we make a
peremptory line, proposing to include them even against their
consent and will - can it be said that these people are likely to
rule and govern the legislation of West Virginia? Can 48,000 people
govern and control 272,000? We will be equally free as they would
be; and in framing this Constitution - this "organic law" the
gentleman spoke of so much - they did not even have a hand. They
are not here to dictate to us; but the proposition we propose to
submit to this people is this: are you for forming a new State and
adopting the Constitution that we here make. Mind, sir, they are
not to frame the Constitution; but we frame the Constitution and
submit it to them; and if they adopt our Constitution, is it not
proof at once that they are with us in sentiment, in feeling, and
in every respect? Are you going to say to this people, if they want
to cut loose from the oppression and tyranny of eastern Virginia,
that they shall not even have an opportunity of expressing their
sentiments and views on this question? If this people do vote to
come here, do you not see by not adopting this resolution you
preclude them from passing on this thing? You say to men there
whose interests are homogeneous with ours - identified with ours,
who have been ruled and controlled by the unfair legislation of
eastern Virginia - you say to them: you shall remain in your
present position. We cut ourselves loose from our brothers who are
holding out their hands and asking for relief and help. Sir, if
they are opposed to this new State movement and our Government, to
the Constitution we frame here, when we submit that question to
them if they have an opportunity of passing upon it, they will vote
against it and that is the end of it. If they are friendly to the
new State, to the Government and to the Constitution we frame here
and submit to them, then they will vote for it; and by your action
here indicated by the gentleman from Wood, although they are for us
in every respect, you say to them, sir, that they shall not come
with us, simply because they lie in the Valley of Virginia. I
understand, sir, these some five or six counties right along the
mountains are in every respect, sir, situated as we have been and
as we are now situated. They have been oppressed with the unfair
legislation of eastern Virginia, it is true, as we have been. They
have controlled the legislation of the people embraced in these
counties and their representatives have always been with us. In the
convention you recollect, of 1850-51, they sat side by side with
us. There, sir, they contended for equal representation, equal
rights, a fair basis and a fair taxation. Every one of them was
with us. Last winter, sir, in the convention in Richmond, we find
this people side by side with us; and I have every reason to
believe, this day, sir, if they were differently circumstanced and
were left free to act for themselves and were not overrun by this
eastern oppression and the armies of this rebellion, they would be
today with us; and if it should happen, sir, that this thing can be
put aside and they have an opportunity to express themselves
against the time that we may sit here, it seems to me unfair,
unjust, unwise and impolitic to say they shall not come in. It
would be the most unkind treatment I have ever seen towards any
people in my life - people who are identified with us in every
interest, who have been with us in all the great issues and fights
we have ever had for equal rights in western Virginia: they have
been side by side with us, and we are not willing to let them say
whether or not they will come in the new State. Simply because they
are overrun there you want to exclude them. It is unfair. I hope it
will not be the sense of this body. I hope, too, gentlemen -
although I have very little hope that the question ever can be
fairly submitted to them within the time you want your Constitution
submitted to the Congress of the United States; but we do not know
what may happen between now and then. Let us, at least, act fairly
and in the very best spirit we are able to; and if their
circumstances do preclude them from coming with us, why, we can
say, we have done all that we could; we have done everything they
could ask of us and if circumstances preclude them, they cannot
blame us for it.

These are
my views. I will vote, Mr. President, for this resolution as
cheerfully as for any that will come before this body. My heart is
in it because I believe those people are with us. I believe their
interest is ours and I believe they will so consider it; and if
they ever get to pass on this question they will vote to come to
West Virginia. It is their natural position. It is a name that has
been applied to them as well as us. They are as much western
Virginians as we are; and they are identified with us in every
respect and in every shape; and they have felt, and feel this day,
the oppression of eastern Virginia legislation, just as much as we
have felt it. They are a set of counties here that in location and
in every interest are identified with us. They are poor; but we are
poor. They have never had one dollar of appropriation for internal
improvements, as we have never had. They are like us in that
respect. I understand that there is no State improvement - or at
least, not any great amount passing through those counties. They
have been taxed as we have been taxed to build up eastern Virginia.
And, now, sir, we seek to cut loose from them and leave them to be
taxed and oppressed for all time to come, when we are seeking
relief ourselves and not even giving them the opportunity to come
with us. I hope this Convention will adopt the
resolution.

MR.
POMEROY. I rise to make a suggestion. When we consider how
precious the time of this Convention is, and remember that this
question has been discussed at such great length in the former
Convention, and since we have heard an able argument on each side,
I would make this suggestion: that we take the vote on this without
further discussion, unless some member is extremely anxious that we
spend this day on the discussion.

MR.
BROWN of Kanawha. I will not say that I am extremely anxious to
discuss this question; and I will say that I feel so unwell that I
am scarcely able to attempt it; nevertheless, a sense of duty
impels me to express my views, however briefly I must do
so.

By
reference to the map it will be seen that after having adopted a
permanent and fixed boundary - that is to say an unconditional
boundary - for this State, which I understand it is the
determination of this Convention to do - to be the boundary,
without consulting the wishes of any person outside of that
boundary, on the hypothesis that those outsiders may be opposed to
it - we then further propose in this and in the third resolution to
add, by the wishes and consent of the people of the counties, a
tier of counties from one end of the State to the other, lying
outside of the present fixed boundary and adjoining each other - by
reference to the map, I say, it will be seen that this resolution
proposes to embrace only half of it; and I will, to raise the
question - for I intend to express what I say in reference to the
whole of them - I shall move, if in order, that the resolution here
be so amended as to adopt both the second and third class, which
embrace the entire tier of counties bordering the State from the
Maryland to the Tennessee line. The justice and the propriety of
it, it seems to me, must be apparent to every eye that looks on the
map: that it would be certainly wrong, unjust and unfair for this
Convention to cast off one half of this tier of counties on one
part of the State and add on the counties bordering on another
portion of the State, thereby destroying the equilibrium between
the two sections of the State, and throwing the whole weight, both
political and physical in the other end.

THE
PRESIDENT. Then the Chair understands the gentleman's
proposition to embrace both resolutions in one?

MR.
BROWN of Kanawha. Yes, sir; to embrace resolutions 2 and 3 in
one vote.

MR. VAN
WINKLE. To make them one district?

MR.
BROWN of Kanawha. No, sir; not to make them one district. I am
willing to do that. Even that is a fairer way; but I want to test
the sense of the Convention upon the proposition that when we
decide it shall decide it all at once; because I am free to say, if
the Convention shall feel themselves constrained to vote off one
end of this I shall feel myself constrained to vote against the
addition of the other end. It is a homogeneous whole - and it
should be all adopted or all rejected.

MR.
POMEROY. I would like to ask a question. In including the whole
in one district, then, according to the proposition, it would
require a majority of all the counties embraced in the district to
add any of them: might not that operate very injuriously to the
feelings and interests of the two counties of Hampshire and Hardy,
represented on this floor?

MR.
BROWN of Kanawha. I think not, sir, these people's interests
and fortunes are all allied together and all allied to us; and that
is the reason why I stand here to advocate this proposition; that
they shall be entitled to the privilege of speaking for themselves.
It has been remarked by my friend on the right that the gentleman
from Wood, in discussing the proposition, seems to have gone on the
hypothesis that we are here attempting to force a Constitution and
government upon an unwilling people, against their sentiment. We
propose no such thing.

THE
PRESIDENT. Would not the object of the gentleman from Kanawha
be better effected by striking out the word "Resolved" and
consolidating the two resolutions? Amend the second resolution by
adding thereto all the third resolution after the word
"Resolved."

MR.
BROWN of Kanawha. Yes, sir, that embraces the idea.

MR. VAN
WINKLE. It would be better accomplished by simply inserting the
names of the counties in the third resolution in the
second.

MR.
BROWN of Kanawha. The idea is the same; it is the end I seek,
not the formula.

I think
then I am distinctly understood in the proposition, that it is to
embrace the counties beginning Jefferson, Berkeley, Morgan,
Hampshire, Hardy, Pendleton, Highland, Bath, Alleghany, Craig,
Giles, Bland, Tazewell, Russell, Lee and Scott.

MR. VAN
WINKLE. It is the counties he wants to include in Tables B and
G accompanying the report of the Committee on Boundary, with the
addition of Buchanan and Wise.

MR.
BROWN of Kanawha. Yes, sir.

THE
PRESIDENT. The suggestion of the gentleman from Wood is to
insert after the counties named in the second resolution (to which
were added Buchanan and Wise) the counties embraced in the third
resolution.

MR.
BROWN of Kanawha. Yes, sir; that meets my object.

THE
PRESIDENT. The question will then be considered in that
way.

MR.
BROWN of Kanawha. Very well, sir. Now, Mr. President, I desire
the Convention, in casting their eyes over this map, to remember
that beginning at the county of Scott -

MR. VAN
WINKLE. The county of Frederick is omitted from the third
resolution but is in the table. Either in transcribing or printing
it has been omitted from the resolution but is in Table C. Will it
be understood that Frederick is included in any remarks the
gentleman makes?

MR.
BROWN of Kanawha. Yes, sir; I am embracing Frederick. Beginning
at the county of Scott, you run but a few miles from the Tennessee
line before you reach the top of Clinch mountain, which is a
mountain range dividing the Holston and Clinch rivers, and runs
almost a straight course in a northeast direction until you strike
the corner of the county of Botetourt. You then continue along a
range of mountains dividing the valley almost in two equal
sections, throwing one tier on the Blue Ridge side and the other on
the Alleghany side. You still follow a mountain range - Mill
mountain, Short mountain, and North Mountain - until you reach the
boundary between Hardy and Shenandoah, and then follow the boundary
between Hardy and Shenandoah until you come to Hampshire; and then
include Morgan, Berkeley and Jefferson. It gives you a mountain
line that divides the Valley from Maryland to Tennessee.

If it be
the purpose of this Convention to refuse to extend to the people
east of that ridge but still in the Valley of Virginia the
privilege of joining this new State if they desire it, then there
are high politic reasons why you should adopt this division line.
It will be remembered also that as you ascend the Kanawha river
from the Ohio you pass through the present boundary line, through
the Alleghany mountain, on up through the counties of Giles,
Montgomery, Pulaski, Carroll and Grayson, and terminate with its
headwaters in the Blue Ridge. The Blue Ridge is the natural
boundary between the waters that flow into the Ohio river and the
waters that flow into the Atlantic Ocean in that section of the
State.

Now, sir,
the argument that we are seeking to embrace a hostile people has
been fully answered by my friend on the right. That these people
are western Virginians as much as we are cannot be questioned; and
as brethren they are as dear to me as the gentlemen who live on the
Ohio or Pennsylvania border. As citizens of West Virginia they are
one common family in every sense. In every battle that we have ever
fought with our eastern brethren they have planted themselves on
this side of the Blue Ridge with us, and have never failed or
faltered. They have always been shoulder to shoulder, as brethren
should be, in struggling for the common rights of West Virginians;
and when we stand here today to appropriate the name that they
together with us have worn I cannot in my conscience say I would be
willing to turn them from it or appropriate it to ourselves without
giving them an opportunity of saying whether they will still take
part in the cause we embark in. It is said that they are diverse
from us in interest. In name they are the same; in blood the same.
For, sir, let me state to you that these counties of Scott,
Tazewell, Giles and Craig furnished the population that have
settled the Kanawha Valley from its head to its mouth, and the
Guyandotte and Twelve Pole and Coal river, and all the intermediate
smaller tributaries. We are then the same in blood relation and in
kindred, and, in no small degree, in commerce. Why, then, should we
cut loose from these people - our brethren and ancestors, you may
say? It said we are diverse in commerce. Now, sir, they are no more
diverse from us than they are from the people on the other side of
that mountain; because these people are not on the line of the
Tennessee Railroad. They have a high mountain barrier, between them
and the valley that contains that road. They can be no more diverse
from us than they will from those people with whom you are seeking
to force them to unite their fortunes for all time to come. And
these people having stood by us in every contest for Western rights
- cut them off absolutely and leave them to the tender mercies of
their eastern brethren, who have heretofore been their foes in
every political sense. After we have struggled and fought together
twenty or thirty years, till nearly the time to take a vote whereby
we shall say the west has the power to determine what shall be the
policy of the State, we immediately cut loose, just before that
event, and turn them over to the tender mercies of their eastern
brothers, in a hopeless minority. We have participated with them in
all the benefits and blessings of past years, and we propose to
leave them without regard to their wishes and interests and that
too upon the merest motive of selfishness that can be adduced. It
seems to me, sir, that we ought to have some higher and nobler
consideration in the establishment of a new-born state. Gentlemen
seem to me to have their ideas based entirely upon the hope of
making a State of foreign strangers and people with whom we have no
association and of whom we have no knowledge. I love my own fellows
and brethren better than strangers; and will give them their rights
and justice first; and then I will invite strangers here and if
they do not choose to come and unite with us as a family and
brethren, then I say to them go and go forever. I seek no alliance
with them before our brethren who have struggled with us for equal
rights and privileges. I stand here to speak for these people as a
Virginian - as one born upon the waters that flow from them; for
these people live upon the Kanawha river. I should feel myself,
sir, humbled in my own estimation, could I stand here and ask to be
cut loose from these people, and not give them the humble privilege
of casting - as they have ever heretofore cast - their fortunes
with us, for all time to come. As my friend over here says, we have
not only fought together but we have borne the common burdens; for
they have been taxed as we have been to improve the eastern portion
of the state, without having received any benefit from it, for
there are such mountain barriers between them and if that it is
almost impossible for them to pass. And shall we leave them there
to be taxed, with no friends to stand by and support them in the
rear? When if we had waited till the Constitutional Convention of
1865, we have the power in our hands to control the whole
legislation and destiny of the State. From the beginning they have
struggled to attain the end of giving the west her proper
representation; and we are now just approximating it; and if we
divide we take from them the power to accomplish anything for
themselves.

But, Mr.
President, there is another view: that in adopting it we should be
just to both sections of this new State. That there are some
diversities of interest, is a fact that is clear and
unquestionable. Why, sir, the people of the new State in this
region have a market with Baltimore, and the people of Kanawha
valley have their market with Cincinnati. Our waters flow there and
we have no other highways anywhere else. West Virginia has been
divided into three portions: the northwest, the middle-west and the
southwest. We have stood in that region the brethren of both,
neither less dear than the other to us - all friends and relatives
and brethren for whom we entertain the highest respect and
affection; for, sir, there is no superior love towards the one or
the other; but we shall look with jealousy if it is sought by the
northwest to throw off these friends from us in order to make us
tributary to the northwest, to receive at their hands only what
they may choose to grant. I want to stand in the new State a
freeman, as I have stood of old, upon terms of equality.

I say,
therefore, in adopting this tier of counties, justice and propriety
demand that if one side is adopted the other shall be, and if one
is excluded all shall be. I am for adopting all with heart and
hand; and I expect to receive a loud plaudit and earnest greeting
from those people at the polls when they record their votes to say
they will come with us; and it will rejoice me that I have taken
the initiative when they were not able to do it.

But, sir,
as I do not wish to speak again on this subject, I will only say
that I feel the same considerations of kindness, respect and the
disposition to mete out justice, to all the people of Virginia. I
wish to make the Blue Ridge the great mountain barrier that is to
separate us. That has always been the natural boundary of the two
sections. I wish when we adopt the name West Virginia, to adopt it
in truth, and carry a falsehood into even the name of our State -
when we are only a part of West Virginia. I wish to be just while
we are generous, and show that in disposing of the interests of the
Commonwealth we will protect the interests of the people who have
borne our name and fought our fights and have a common interest
with us. I hope that this Convention will not hesitate a moment in
saying to our brethren, as we ought to say, that in forming this
new State it is not our purpose to cut loose from you, or refuse
you, our valley western Virginia brethren, the privilege of voting
yourselves in with us if you choose.

MR.
SINSEL. If it would be in order, I would offer to amend the
resolution, as proposed to be amended by the gentleman from Kanawha
by striking out the word "cast," in the 15th line and also in the
22d line - just to strike out the word "cast." It would read then
-

The
Secretary reported the resolution, as if amended, as fol-
lows:

"RESOLVED,
That the district comprising the counties of Lee, Scott, Wise,
Buchanan, Russell, Tazewell, Bland, Giles, Graig, Allleghany, Bath,
Highland, Pendleton, Hardy, Hampshire, Morgan, Berkeley, Jefferson
and Frederick shall be included in and constitute part of the
proposed new State, provided a majority of the votes within the
said district, at elections to be held for the purpose on the third
Thursday in April, in the year 1862, and a majority of the said
counties, are in favor of the adoption of the Constitution, to be
submitted to this Convention."

THE
PRESIDENT. Would it not be better to try it on the other
amendment and then bring up this?

MR.
SINSEL. Very well; I just wanted to give notice of my intention
to make that motion.

MR. VAN
WINKLE. What will be the effect of the motion?

MR.
SINSEL. The effect will be this, that before that district
could come into the new State it would require a majority of the
votes within the district, and not a majority of those that voted -
that is, the whole of them - a majority of the people to be
annexed.

MR.
BATTELLE. Allow me to suggest to the gentleman whether his end
would not be better attained by striking out the words "votes cast"
and inserting the words "qualified voters."

MR.
HALL of Marion. I believe it is not in order to offer the
amendment at this stage.

Several
Members. Yes, sir.

MR.
HALL of Marion. O, then, it is but two stories. I was under the
impression it was already three stories high.

The hour
for vacating the Chair having arrived the Convention took a
recess.

THE
PRESIDENT (remarking) We have adopted a resolution pledging
ourselves to meet here at 2 o'clock and go from here to the Fifth
Ward School; and I hope members will bear in mind the adoption of
that resolution.

FOUR O'CLOCK, P. M.

The Convention reassembled.

THE PRESIDENT. When the Convention took a recess, it had
under consideration the second resolution of the report of the
Committee on Boundary, and the proposition of the gentleman from
Kanawha to insert in the second resolution all the counties
contained in the third. That proposition was further proposed to be
amended by the gentleman from Taylor. Is that amendment still
insisted on?

MR. SINSEL. If the Chair decides that it is not in order
I will withdraw; but not unless it is decided out of order.

The amendment I wished to move was to strike out "votes cast"
and insert "qualified voters."

MR. POMEROY. I hope my friend will withdraw that till
this amendment is decided on; and that will come in on the whole
resolution together if that fails.

MR. SINSEL. I have no objection to withdraw it.

THE PRESIDENT. The question then is on the amendment of
the gentleman from Kanawha.

MR. STUART of Doddridge. I again find myself under the
necessity of taking exceptions to the amendment of the gentleman
from Kanawha. The object of the Committee in classifying these
counties into various districts was for the purpose of
accommodating, as far as possible the feeling and sentiment of the
different sections of country. What the amendment of the gentleman
now proposes is to include in the second resolution not only the
counties of Lee, Scott, Wise, Buchanan, Russell, Tazewell, Bland,
Giles and Craig, already contained in it but the counties of
Alleghany, Bath, Highland, Pendleton, Hardy, Hampshire, Morgan,
Berkeley, Jefferson and Frederick, embraced by the third
resolution.

Mr. President, one of my reasons for opposing the amendment
proposed by the gentleman from Kanawha is that we tie down these
Union counties - counties which we have every reason to suppose are
Union - to a set of counties that perhaps would vote them out of
the State. The resolution as it stands submits the question to the
various districts - requiring a majority of the votes cast and a
majority of the counties in favor of the new State to secure their
admission. Now, sir, by attaching these counties to the counties of
Alleghany, Bath, Highland, Pendleton, Hardy, Hampshire, Morgan,
Berkeley, Jefferson and Frederick, you fix them in such a way that
they will be influenced by the secession vote of the other
counties; and counties that are anxious to come with us will be
kept out from the fact that in this large district, as proposed by
the gentleman, there will be no possibility for the Union men to
carry a majority of these counties; and although nine out of twenty
may vote to come into the new State, still the eleven voting
against it will carry the nine Union counties out of it.

It seems to me it would be much fairer and better to let these
people vote by districts. These counties of Craig, Giles, Bland,
Tazewell, Russell, Buchanan, Wise, Scott and Lee lie away down here
in what we call the "Southwest." The counties of Frederick,
Jefferson, Berkeley, Morgan, Hampshire, etc. lie, sir, in the
northern part of the State right along the Baltimore and Ohio
Railroad. We are more intimately connected with them, and their
interests are more identified with ours than the counties down in
the southwest. We see one or two of these counties have had an
opportunity of expressing partially their views. The counties of
Hampshire and Hardy are represented on this floor. We know nothing
about the sentiments of the people down here in Giles, Tazewell,
Russell, Scott and Lee. We have every reason to suppose - or at
least I have - that at the present time those people are adverse to
the adoption of the new State. I have every reason to believe the
counties of Hampshire, Hardy, Morgan, Berkeley and Jefferson are
favorable to the new State and will come with us if they can get an
opportunity. And I have every reason to believe that these people
will be in a situation in a short period of time to be able to
express their opinions. We see a part of them are already cleared
of rebels. We have an army right in their midst - in the counties
of Hampshire and Hardy; and in all probability before this question
is submitted to these people they will have an opportunity of
acting. But if you attach them to these other counties in the
southwest, by the time you propose to submit this question to them,
these other counties cannot even vote, and you tie the hands of the
counties that can: and it is virtually saying to these people, you
shall not come in. I cannot see why it is the gentleman wants to
tie up the people of the northern border here on the Baltimore and
Ohio Railroad, with these southwestern counties.

Now, Mr. President, I believe if this thing can be postponed,
and the question submitted to these people at a later day than,
probably, it will be, after the rebel army is completely cleared
out of the southwest, so that these people can vote new State or no
new State - if the question is presented to them in this form, and
they have either got to go with the old State or the new - they
will vote almost unanimously to come with the new State. But, then,
sir, from the circumstances surrounding them, I do not believe they
will have the privilege - at least in the time indicated by the
Convention, to express their sentiments upon it. Therefore, I do
not desire to see one district denied this right which is granted
to another. I do not want to see one district which may have an
opportunity of expressing their wishes on this matter tied to
another that cannot have it. As I before said, it is virtually
saying to these counties of Hampshire, Hardy, Morgan, etc. that
they shall not come into the new State, unless circumstances change
very fast and the armies of the Federal government prevail at a
much earlier period than we can now anticipate. It is effectually,
gentlemen, discarding the principle of this resolution. It is
saying that you do not want to give these people an opportunity.
Let them all come up fairly and squarely. Let every section of
country express its own sentiments. If one section of country is
relieved of the presence of the rebel army and they have an
opportunity of being heard, let us hear them. I for my part feel
bound to oppose the amendment offered by the gentleman from
Kanawha.

MR. POMEROY. If it is ordained by the powers that be that
this discussion must go on, I beg leave to offer a few reasons why
I will be constrained to cast my vote against the amendment of the
gentleman from Kanawha. As I think it has been very correctly and
very forcibly stated by the gentleman who has just taken his seat
there is no propriety that I can conceive in grouping these two
districts into one. I do not now recollect the names of all the
gentlemen that compose the Committee on Boundary; nor is that
material to the great matter in hand. I know the gentleman who has
just taken his seat is the Chairman. I have no doubt that they have
valid and forcible reasons that weighed upon their minds in coming
to the conclusion at which they arrived, that there were certain
counties grouped together, because they had in many respects - if
not indeed a common interest, that their people mingled freely
together; that they had intercourse one with another. Each of them
knew the minds of each other; and therefore they were thrown into
groups and called a particular district, while another set of
counties were thrown into another. And I cannot conceive what is
the real reason for offering this amendment. I listened with all
the ears I have to the gentleman from Kanawha; but I cannot
perceive any valid reason for taking this course. There are twenty
counties now grouped together. If eleven of them open no poll
whatever, why then, the other nine cannot possibly come in; because
the resolution provides that not only must you have a majority of
the votes cast, but you must have a majority of the counties. It
will take eleven to be a majority of twenty. Therefore, if these
counties of Hampshire, Hardy, Berkeley, etc. vote to come into the
new State, they are deprived of that privilege by the vote of
eleven other counties, wherever they may be. And I think it is not
talking in a spirit of persiflage to say that there will be no poll
opened. I confess I have read the history of this rebellion wrong
if some of these things are exactly to the full intent that the
gentlemen in the person of their arguments would appear to wish to
show. If there are any counties proposed to be received here that
had difficulties in reaching this place it would be the county of
Frederick or Berkeley or Jefferson, and yet as early as May we find
the delegates from those counties on the floor of a Convention
here. But at what time in the history of this proceeding have we
seen a man from the county of Craig or Tazewell; but what
particular camp of either of these armies was located in these
particular counties we never have heard. Why were they not here?
Ah, but there is another fact more stubborn than that. Why in the
polls of May, the counties of Hampshire, Hardy and Berkeley - and
even Jefferson - poll, most of them a majority and in all of them a
respectable vote for the Union; but when you come to Tazewell and
Craig, the Union votes are "like angels visits." Is this so? If it
is, is it not because their sentiments are not with the people
here? Because they willingly go at the nod of Jefferson Davis and
Company. They have not even a single letter here to show that they
wish to have anything to do with us. What is their tone in regard
to the provisional government we have established here? "Bogus
Government!" If a man is compelled to stay at his home, he is not
compelled to give utterance to language like this in regard to a
government recognized by the government of the United States. He is
not bound by every action when he rises up and when he lies down to
be teaching his children and neighbors that this government by
which we free ourselves from the bondage to which we have been
subjected heretofore is a bogus government. I tell you the
secessionists have learned this all over the land. They all sing
the same tune everywhere, from the upper end of the Panhandle to
the lowest end of the State of Virginia. They all cry out this is a
bogus concern; and they are using every effort that men can
possibly use for the defeat of the whole thing. And, say gentlemen,
these men are our friends! We read somewhere of a man that had
friends in former times; and when the battle waxed warm they
vanished away. And I think this is the kind of friends we have in
Craig and Tazewell.

But I do not want to enter into a full discussion of the merits
of these different districts of counties upon the amendment I wish
to adhere strictly to a consideration of the amendment that is
before us - that is to group all these counties together and let
them all stay out unless a majority of them say come in. I am
opposed to that. I am opposed to placing counties that have shown
some signs of a desire to be with us on the same footing with
counties that show none whatever that they want to have anything to
do with us - that show, on the other hand, their hostility on every
occasion that they can. I will venture this prediction, and I do
not fear successful contradiction of it on this floor, because I
think I can bring proof to establish it - that upon the streets of
Charleston (S. C.) the people did not more rashly rush into the
hostile army than did these people from the county of Tazewell and
those adjoining. Not content with staying, as they sometimes said,
to defend the "sacred soil" of Old Virginia, we find men from these
counties fighting at the battle of Piketon, in Kentucky. What made
the soil of Kentucky so sacred to these men that had always had
such strong affection and were bound by so many ties to the "Old
Dominion?" They certainly didn't claim that Piketon belonged to
them! Why so eager to meet our army under Nelson and Moore and
Harris at Piketon ? Was that to defend the sacred soil of Virginia?
It was because they had a love for the soil of the rebellion. I
have fears they will open no polls if you make it the third
Thursday of April, or the third day of the next January or the last
day in the afternoon (Laughter). Then why should we make these
loyal men stand or fall with them? They have no desire to be here
with you. There is no insuperable barrier that keeps them from
being here today, if they wished to be here. The same road that
took them to Piketon - it was a very circuitous route - might have
been travelled by them. They might have dispatched a messenger in
some way that would have expressed their wishes on the floor of
this house. But no such expression has come - no desire to be with
us. Their interests, it is said, are identical with ours. Strange
that they have not manifested it in some way by calling to us in
the day of adversity! That man who is a friend only when the sun
shines upon me, and whose love is all gone when the day of darkness
comes is a professed friend that I would have less confidence in
than an open enemy. The man that is a true western Virginian and a
true man to those stars and stripes that hang above you, Mr.
President, now, is the man that clings to them with tenacity when
the day of trouble is upon us. It is easy for a man to be a Union
man when there is no secession element around him. It is an easy
thing to speak out his sentiments boldly in behalf of that Flag
when it is waving in triumph over us; but it is a different thing
to stand by it when its enemies trail it in the dust, and bring
disgrace and dishonor on it and on those who have hitherto
successfully upheld it. It was eloquently said here, not long ago,
that there was no Southern Confederacy; and I thank the Lord that
there never will be! This Union is "one and inseparable" I know
that these eastern Virginians will after while be as loyal as any
men, apparently; and this secession element amongst us will not
only be loyal, but when they come 'round asking the people to vote
for them they will say they were always true to the Union - when
they find the current is the other way.

But what evidence have you that these people could open polls on
the third Thursday of April? The general government is not
directing much attention to such counties as Tazewell and Craig.
They have more important points in view. There is no great
importance in gaining a victory down there. What would you have
gained by a triumph in the counties of Scott, Tazewell and
Craig?

They are not going to spend their time in sending bands of men
into this rough uncultivated country, to hunt up a few men who are
in war against the Government. And you have no evidence whatever
that there will be an army march there before April. What evidence
have you that these men who have nursed this rebellion and started
it, to the present day, will so speedily be brought to repentance
that they will have changed their entire course and be willing to
come up and say, on the third Thursday of April, it is true from
May to December we vilified and abused and exhausted the vocabulary
with abuse of, this provisional government, and this idea of a new
State; but all at once the scales fell from our eyes and we
discovered the error of ways, and we come to you, brethren, in
penitence, and say, here receive us. What evidence of that have
you, Mr. President? None whatever.

But look at the argument on the opposite side. The other day it
was right to go to the Alleghany mountains, because nature had
built up a barrier there that could not well be left undefended. We
must go up to the Alleghanies, whether the people were willing to
come or not. There is a great natural boundary; that is plain upon
the map. That was the argument, though, that there was a great
natural boundary; and now we have got to that and these same
gentlemen want to go over on the other side, so that wherever the
enemy comes up we will have to pass over this great natural
boundary to defend ourselves over there. Now, isn't it strange what
queer creatures we men are - that the argument was that they must
come in, witty nitty - that they must not be left to their choice
at all. But now the whole aspect of things is changed, and now the
gentleman says he will leave it to their own free-will, and if they
come, we will say, very well, brother, we receive you and if they
say, No, why then the gentleman will say to them depart forever, we
want nothing to do with you. Why would not that have done in regard
to the other counties? If it is good in one case it is good in the
other.

But there is another great objection I have to this: the
legislature of the State of Virginia is to give her consent to this
matter. When will this legislature give it? If I understand aright
the regulations in regard to the Legislature of Virginia, their
session is ninety days. Those ninety days don't count by taking
five days out of one month and ten out of another, but from the
time they assemble it expires in ninety days, unless three-fifths
think it necessary to prolong the session. They can prolong for
thirty days. Add thirty to ninety, and I think it reaches to about
the 28th of March. When do you propose to submit this matter? On
the third Thursday of April. Oh, but you are met with the argument
that the governor can call the legislature together in
extraordinary session. Well, now, would it be wise to hazard this
whole new State movement on so many contingencies? To delay until
after the third Thursday of April and then risk having the
legislature reconvened? I understand - and I believe I am correctly
informed - that already a resolution they have introduced looking
to an adjournment of that body upon the 19th of the present month.
One of the great reasons, I judge, why, is that the action of this
Convention may be submitted to the people and come up before them
when they assemble again. Suppose they adjourn and meet again
sometime before the ninety days expire, go on with other business
and still this matter is not ready to come before them - when are
we going to get through to Washington? If this matter is to be
delayed, contingencies may arise that will be against us. Let me
mention a contingency that I think has some weight. The legislature
that is now in session does not call itself - I appeal to honorable
gentlemen who are members of that body as well as this, they do not
call themselves - a legislature of a little part of Virginia; but
they say we are members of the legislature of the Old Dominion,
from the Eastern Shore to the Ohio. We do not represent any small
part of the State, but we represent it all. We are the men that are
clothed with power to legislate not for the people within the
bounds of West Virginia only, but for the people that live in the
city of Richmond, and everywhere else within the bounds of the
state. Is not that true? Why is it we have men on the floor of that
house even from the banks of the Potomac right from near to the
seat of government of the United States? Is it not so? Suppose
these men are as cunning as they have manifested themselves in
carrying on this rebellion and they say the consent of the
legislature has to be granted. They were elected last May in the
counties of Rockingham, Rockbridge, etc. members of the legislature
as well as the honorable gentlemen that have been sitting in the
city of Wheeling. Suppose they come out here and claim their seats
and vote on this matter of giving consent - where are you then?

MR. VAN WINKLE. Will they take the oath?

MR. POMEROY. Take the oath? I would as lief swear a
rattlesnake never to bite again and let it go as to swear one of
these fellows. Take the oath! What is it they are required to
swear? An oath of allegiance to the general government and the
newly- formed government of Virginia. I think they would take that
without having very many scruples about it. Why, they are in a
dreadful predicament. They are engaged in a rebellion that they do
not see the end of, and they are surrounded by circumstances that
might very strongly influence them in taking such an oath and to
come out here and say. Yes, we are loyal to the government; and we
are loyal to it as we understand it and when we think it is rightly
administered and say, we do not grant our consent to this division.
I am no prophet, but I tell you this is far more likely to arise
than it is that you will get the first vote for this new State in
Tazewell county. I would not be afraid to stake my reputation that
the one is more likely to occur than the other. If I thought as
they do, I would do as they do. If I thought this government was
all bogus and spurious, I would have nothing to do with it. They
say they think so, and their actions say they do think so. Now I
want to say - don't want to consume the time of the Convention; I
suggested that the discussion should close this morning, and it
would therefore be inconsistent in me to consume much time - I
think the members of this Convention are true to the people who
sent them here, and that to carry out their views they will vote
against this amendment and then let the counties stand upon their
merits. It may be that it will be necessary to take out Hampshire
and Hardy from this other group of counties. It may be that owing
to the peculiar circumstances that surround them it will be
necessary to take them out of the group. I do not know that that
will be done; but I do hope that this Convention is not going to do
that which will materially injure the prospects of the new State at
the city of Washington. A man would take up this other and say: why
these people say that out there they are just about like we are
over in Ohio; that they have the same kind of feelings and
interests and institutions that we have. And he will look along and
find a certain county included that has more slaves in it than
white people. Why, I have been voting for years against this
principle, and yet you ask me to vote for it. It is true, you say
you are all right; but here you introduce a disloyal element -
introduce men that have been warning against us all the time - men
saying we ought to be put not only out of power but off of the face
of the earth. You ask that these men that have been in actual arms
against the general government shall now be admitted with all the
rights and privileges of any other commonwealth. And you ask them
to receive you. If these counties have claims to come in let them
be presented here on the naked resolution reported by the
committee.

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. Please to tell me, sir, what county
you allude to that has more black men than white in it.

MR. POMEROY. Clarke county is one of them.

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. That is not the group we were
speaking of.

MR. POMEROY. That remark is intended in opposition to
introducing any of those counties that will prejudice our cause at
Washington. Clarke, I think, is on one of the lists.

MR. POMEROY. Well, there is a number of these counties
come so near it, it is very plain to any man they will not be
received.

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. Will the gentleman please inform us
what counties come near it.

MR. POMEROY. There is a number that have a large colored
population. Here is, for instance the little county of Tazewell
which has 1,202 slaves.

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. What is the number of whites?

MR. POMEROY. The number of whites is 8,627.

I want to say one word, Mr. President, in regard to the position
we occupy; and I will use very plain language. I consider that we
in this part of Virginia - now called new Virginia - if this
application fails before Congress, occupy an extremely ridiculous
position. We have been in Convention time and again and we have
gone on and made the people believe this new State project was a
matter beyond all question and all doubt. We have been assured that
if certain things were done - and one of them was argued
strenuously by a distinguished member of the former convention, who
now holds a prominent position in the Congress of the United
States, that if we would keep the boundaries down and not include
this foreign and hostile element - our success was beyond a
peradventure. But it was said at the same time that if we
introduced it, it was in his opinion, to incur certain defeat. Men
everywhere that I converse with in this region of country say that
every county we add over and beyond those specified in the
ordinance for a division of the state and which have expressed by
letter or in person a desire to be brought in, is incurring a great
risk at the city of Washington or before Congress. Now, why should
we do all this? Oh, says a man, if you get these counties of Craig
and Giles and Bland, Tazewell, etc. they will help pay the public
debt. They will! Will they? If the public debt is apportioned
according to population, will they help us. any more than the
amount of additional debt which will fall to our share? If a
certain county, when the public debt was divided would have a
certain amount to pay, if you had another county of the same size
and paying the same amount of revenue with the county first named,
will you not have just double the amount to pay; and then what will
you get? Oh, we are met with the argument, it is a glorious thing
to have an extended territory and a big state. There is no telling
who will be governor after a while; and it is a great thing to have
a big dominion. But the history of this country shows that the
states that this day have money in their treasuries and loaned out
in addition to their public improvements are the smallest states in
the Union. Any gentleman ask what states they are? They are
Delaware and Connecticut. They are not only out of debt but have
money invested and drawing interest. And are they very large? Ever
hear any person saying down in little Delaware they would like to
have a few more counties just to have a bigger name? Not at all.
The prosperity of a state does not depend on the extent of its
territory. It depends on the people being identical in interest and
harmonious in action; when they come to legislate through .their
representatives, legislating for the good of the whole people and
not for the good of a certain portion of the people, who may have
preserved the power in their hands, when they know that they are
legislating against the interests of the other portion of the
people. That is what makes a people prosperous. It is a liberal
policy, where the people feel they are all freemen - where they can
stand up in their majesty and strength and assert their rights, and
having a people that

"Know their rights; and knowing dare maintain."

And such a people we have, if we do not introduce this foreign
and hostile element. But if this people are to be voted in, why
vote them in as the committee recommends.

I have thus, Mr. President, given very briefly my reasons, that
the gentleman from Kanawha may know how I stand. I may have spoken
with some warmth; but when I speak, Mr. President, I speak like I
was in earnest, but with the best of feelings towards this
gentleman and all others. When I speak, I speak as if I meant what
I say.

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. I do not rise to discuss the
question. I can very heartily reciprocate the kind feelings of my
friend over the way. Most of his argument, it seems to me was
predicated on a state of the case that it was not my purpose to
present. I shall therefore, to correct that impression, ask for the
reading of the resolution as it will stand if the amendment
prevail.

The Secretary reported it as follows:

"RESOLVED, That the district comprising the counties of Lee,
Scott, Wise, Buchanan, Russell, Tazewell, Bland, Giles, Craig,
Alleghany, Bath, Highland, Pendleton, Hardy, Hampshire, Morgan,
Berkeley, Jefferson and Frederick, shall be included in and
constitute part of the proposed new State; provided a majority of
the votes cast within the said district at elections to be held for
the purpose on the third Thursday in April, in the year 1862, and a
majority of the said counties, are in favor of the adoption of the
Constitution to be submitted to this Convention."

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. I desire the amendment to conform
to this: I do not wish that one of these sections should be the
means of defeating the other. That is not my object. I only wish in
presenting them to this body, to present them both as a boundary
that the people shall have a right to vote upon. If the southwest
section does not vote itself in by a majority of the people and
counties in that section, I do not wish to force that section in,
by tying on a vote at the other end of the district, against their
will, and therefore I have drawn up a modification of it, so as to
vote on it as two separate districts by inserting after the second
resolution complete the words "and that the district comprising the
counties of Jefferson" and so on shall be admitted if they vote in
by a majority of votes and a majority of the counties casting the
vote. It was not my purpose to change the precise relationship in
which these two sections stand as first reported by the Committee
on Boundary, but that in taking the vote we shall submit them to
the Convention both at once.

THE PRESIDENT. That was the object of the Chair in
proposing to the gentleman from Kanawha to strike out the word
"Resolved," between the two sections.

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. Then, sir, I will ask to withdraw
that amendment and insert this in lieu of it that it may raise the
question fairly: Strike out "Resolved" at the beginning of the
third resolution and insert "and." That presents the idea complete
I believe.

MR. SINSEL. I suppose it will now be proper for my
amendment to come in.

MR. STUART of Doddridge. Let us test this amendment
first.

MR. SINSEL. But then that cuts mine out.

THE PRESIDENT. The motion is only to amend; and the
amendment suggested by the gentleman from Taylor, would be in order
at any time between the disposition of this amendment, and the vote
on the passage of the resolution.

MR. SINSEL. If I understand the way he has changed it
now, it just stands as originally reported by the committee.

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. No, sir; it brings on the vote upon
both districts at once.

Will the Secretary report the amendment?

The Secretary reported as follows:

"RESOLVED, That the district comprising the counties of Craig,
Giles, Bland, Tazewell, Russell, Buchanan, Wise, Lee, and Scott
shall be included in and constitute part of the proposed new State,
provided a majority of the votes cast within the said district, at
elections to be held for the purpose on the third Thursday in
April, in the year 1862, and a majority of the said counties, are
in favor of the adoption of the Constitution, to be submitted to
this Convention; and that the district comprising the counties of
Jefferson, Frederick, Berkeley, Morgan, Hampshire, Hardy,
Pendleton, Highland, Bath, and Allegheny shall also be included in
and constitute part of the proposed new State, provided a majority
of the votes cast within the said district, at elections to be held
for the purpose on the third Thursday in April, in the year 1862,
and a, majority of the said counties are in favor of the adoption
of the Constitution to be submitted by this Convention."

MR. VAN WINKLE. I do not feel like saying a great deal on
this subject; but I do not like the vote to be taken upon the
resolution in the shape it has taken, after such a general course
of argument, without a word or two. I hope my friend from Kanawha
will withdraw his amendment, and leave these districts as they
were. I think the gentleman from Hancock has shown that there is a
fairness in that towards the counties interested, and that by
leaving them as the committee placed them it will tend to insure a
proper expression of the feelings, of the people - or rather the
result that will be returned to us will be more in accordance with
the wishes of the people, than if the two districts were blended
together. There are eleven counties in the one district in the
southwest and ten in that which will be the northeast. The eleven
counties contain 20,000 white population less 'than the ten
counties. But while this double majority is required - which, I
suppose, would be very proper if the districts are properly
adjusted -

THE PRESIDENT. The impression of the Chair is that while
they are all thrown under the one resolution now they would not be
counted together on the vote at all. Under this resolution the
counties in the northeast district might come in, while those in
the other might be thrown out.

MR. VAN WINKLE. Then, I can see no object, sir, in the
amendment, unless they are made in one great district, whether they
are passed in one resolution or two.

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. It is to enable the Convention to
vote on both at once.

MR. VAN WINKLE. It is to operate merely on the vote of
the Convention, is it? Well, sir, I hope that is not necessary. I
want to consider them, sir, separate, and show if I can that there
are reasons why each of these districts should have an opportunity
to express their opinions separately on this subject. In relation
to these southwestern counties, about which the gentleman from
Kanawha is very properly anxious, my own impression is -
notwithstanding what has been said in relation to their votes and
conduct, and judging, sir, from their neighbors and the history of
those counties which we have in more detail than from the counties
in question - judging that they are a similar people to those
around them, and that a mere geographical line, sir, makes but
little difference in the opinions and interests of people - and men
are governed by these more or less - I should infer, sir, that if
an opportunity had been afforded to the people of these counties,
as to many other counties, to my own and this, and those in the
immediate vicinity - their vote would have been different from what
it is reported to have been. We all know, sir, that in a very early
period of this struggle the mails were cut off. We know also that
their mail facilities have never been very great. Their population
is sparse, although some of them in their aggregate will rank with
a great many other counties in other portions of the proposed
State; but as a general rule, their population is sparse and from
the mountainous character of the country is in some degree
inaccessible. I do not suppose poll-books could have been sent to
those counties for the purpose of taking this vote. The convention
of August ordered poll-books to be sent to those counties in which
it was proposed to take the vote; but I doubt if there were any
sent. We know there was great difficulty in circulating documents
in Kanawha up to the last moment. Well, sir, if such was the case
with Kanawha, it was certainly so with these more remote counties,
without the same facilities. I am therefore, sir, very strongly
inclined to believe that when proper information reaches the people
of these counties - when the thing is properly explained to them -
when they have learned what we have done and what we are proposing
to do for them - I apprehend, sir, they will only be too happy to
accept it. If they become satisfied in their own minds, sir, that a
State is to be set up here - say the thirty-nine with the addition
of McDowell and the counties in table A - then their interests
would lead them to this connection. I have looked very closely at
the map - as closely as I could - at the direction of their water
courses, which governs the channel of trade. It governs the leading
roads or lines in a county. It is also in their direction that our
railroads are built, a great deal with reference to them, because
it is only along their valleys that favorable ground can be had.
Looking to that, sir, their position with reference to the
mountains - seeing that they are cut off, as it were, by a chain of
mountains from direct intercourse with what will remain the old
state - that the country towards Kentucky, west of them is more
open - that their water courses penetrate in that direction - and
other things of this kind. I infer at once that their commercial
interests would lead them to a connection with the new State. And,
sir, so inferring and so believing, I do not feel that we would be
doing justice to those counties to exclude them - I do not say from
coming into the State; but to exclude them from the opportunity of
saying whether they will come or not. It might be a different
question in regard to these counties if we were placing them in the
same category as those which we acted on Saturday. If we were about
to say peremptorily that they should come in, it would indeed be
placing them in a different position; but when the question is
merely: shall they be permitted to say for themselves, on a
principle which I think is as fair as anything that can be offered
- that of a majority of the people and of the counties - when it is
only to say this to them, sir, I do not feel we would do either
justice to them or to ourselves if we withheld from them the
opportunity. If they are so averse to a union with us, as the
gentleman from Hancock affirmed - if they did not take that view of
their interests which it seems to me is the proper view - or if
from any other cause they do not incline to the connection - they
have only to signify it by their votes, and there is the end of the
question so far as relates to them.

It seems to me, sir, then in the absence of positive information
as to how they would vote, or as to what their feelings may be in
reference to a new state, we have reason to suppose at least that a
part of them are favorable to it.

I think again, sir, we should not do justice either to them or
to ourselves to withhold from them the mere opportunity of voting
themselves in. I have already said, sir, that I do not wish to see
the two districts joined together; nor I think it is going to
affect the votes of this Convention one way or the other. I think
those who are disposed to give the State a liberal share of
territory - and that we certainly ought all to seek for - those who
are willing to include sufficient population to give her
respectability among the other states of the Union - those who are
disposed to give this question when it comes before Congress the
importance of a suitable population - and, sir, permit me to say
that in asking the Congress of the United States to admit us as one
of the states of the Union, with a white population of only
272,000, and give that State as they must necessarily give it, two
Senators, unless the doctrine of Mr. Cameron, that they can
override constitutional provisions prevails - I say, sir, when we
go there asking for two Senators with this population, when in the
State of New York upwards of three million have but two Senators -
in Pennsylvania nearly three million, in Ohio two and a quarter
millions, and I believe there are several states that number a
million, and there are some that come very near that number - now,
sir, if by taking in this territory, that which is embraced in all
the resolution, we shall go there with a white population
approaching 600,000 - then, sir, we may go before them and with
some propriety ask them to admit us and concede to us the usual
privileges of a state. We come also with the argument which the new
states, or territories erected into states, may use, or which is so
necessary that it is not necessary to use it: they come there with
a great extent of fertile land; and although at the moment of their
admission they may be no greater in population than what we have,
yet, sir, there is almost an absolute certainty, which no man will
attempt to gainsay, that within a very few years their population
will, perhaps, be equal to that of a fourth of the rest of the
Union. But, sir, confining ourselves to these thirty-nine counties
- considering how much mountainous land we have - considering that
perhaps the most valuable occupation of a great portion of it will
be the raising of sheep and cattle, and consequently a large
population will not be called for - considering all these things -
the rugged character of our country, and other circumstances
connected with it - we cannot wield the same argument as a new
state of prairie country and say we expect within a given time to
be a numerous population. We may double in time; but still in
comparison with the loyal states of the Union, we must be a small
state. I think that is the difficulty which members of Congress
will encounter. Because with sixty-four Senators there. New York
for instance, has one-thirty-second part. Now, increase that number
to one hundred and New York has one-fiftieth part. This is a
consideration that they will pay some attention to; and it may be a
difficulty between members of Congress and their constituents about
admitting so small a territory into the privileges of a separate
state.

I am therefore anxious to embrace within these boundaries all
the territory that can be properly embraced within it - all that is
likely to be of benefit to the new State - all that lies so
contiguous and compactly with us as to tend to make our State
better than without it. I think, sir, that in reference to those
counties which are embraced in table C, there will hardly be a
gentleman of this Convention prepared to say he would not have them
if he could get them. They are, perhaps, some of them the finest in
the new State, and bid fair to be the wealthiest. They also contain
within their limits that great public work known as the Baltimore
and Ohio Railroad, one upon which the prosperity of this section of
the State and my own depends, but upon which is ultimately to
depend, to a greater or less extent, that of the whole territory we
propose to annex.

Sir, I look to see if this new State is erected and the business
of the country returns to what it has been - I look to see another
branch running from the Baltimore and Ohio Road, at Grafton, or the
Northwestern Virginia Road, at Clarksburg, through Weston, through
Charleston and away down into Kentucky. That part of the State, and
this, perhaps every portion of the thirty-nine or forty-four
counties - will have this channel of connection with the seaboard.
That will be according to what I have already stated - in the
direction of their principal water course, the Ohio river, and
therefore in the direction of their trade. If we annex these valley
counties, sir, again, that great work will come into play. The
railroad now leading from Harper's Ferry to Winchester will be
extended to Strasburg, and further will penetrate the valley. In
this way, sir, I apprehend the fostering of the Baltimore and Ohio
Railroad and its connections becomes an interest to every one of
the citizens of the present and proposed limits of the new State.
It is something, sir, towards the interests of that road - and
which cannot be so well understood by members who have not been so
directly connected with it as many of us have - but it will be a
great thing for the interest of that road whenever it finds itself
in the hands of friends. There is no other reason, I believe, why
that road has not come up to its great connections further south
except the adverse legislation of Virginia. They have set
themselves on the erection of other works - those leading to their
own capitals in the East - their own seaports; and have endeavored
from time to time to throw obstacles in the way of that road. It is
natural, sir, they should want to promote their own interests more
than the interests of those far remote from them; but as a portion
of that road is constructed through what are now the northern
counties of Virginia, unless they are brought into the new State,
that portion of it must always remain subject to such adverse
legislation. It is, therefore, highly important to that interest -
highly important to every interest that is now or may become to any
extent dependent on that road - and many are dependent on it now
indirectly that I hope will become more directly so - it is of
importance I say, that that road should be placed wholly within the
State of Maryland and the proposed State of West Virginia.

These are considerations which I trust will not be overlooked by
the members of this Convention. If the counties below us - below
the Little Kanawha river - which no part of that railroad now
crosses, are looking forward to that prosperity which seems to be
in a great degree dependent on the erection of railroads - if they
are looking to have themselves, put on a footing with the states
north and west of them - this I think, sir, is their opportunity. I
have no faith, sir, that under any circumstances will the erection
of the Central road be resumed - that it will progress beyond its
present terminus; and my want of faith is on this score: they have
pushed and finished with much more zeal and industry the Virginia
and Tennessee Railroad. That road is in the direction of a very
heavy trade. Up to the day these troubles commenced, Richmond and
Norfolk were reaping a very fine harvest from it. That road must
have an eastern transportation if it ever succeeds in reaching the
Ohio; but it cannot have a western transportation if there is
nothing but a few boxes of manufactured tobacco to be carried over
it. It crosses the line of trade; and that is enough to show what
its fate will be in the future.

I think, therefore, the counties, even those that lie south of
the Little Kanawha river, looking to be one day penetrated by a
branch of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad, (whether belonging to
that road or an independent company), knowing at present that it is
their shortest and best connection with the east - I apprehend that
those gentlemen will overlook minor considerations and join with us
in endeavoring to unite those counties to the new State.

I am a little surprised to hear one objection that has been
started here on account of the numbers of the slave population.
Without wishing to go into an argument on that subject, for it is a
somewhat gloomy one, and I deprecate such an argument on this
floor, I will merely state: in the first place, if we add all this
territory embraced in the recapitulation, including the four tables
and the four sets of counties in the tables, to the original
thirty-nine counties, the whole slave population will be but
eight-and-a- half per cent. And now, sir, what does that amount to?
Is there anything in that to raise any question whatever? Is that
enough slave population to give it the character of a slave-state?
And if it is not practically a slave-state, can even those who long
for a free state object to it? But, sir, let us look at another
fact in connection with that. In 1850, as the gentleman from
Doddridge stated, there was but one vote, if I recollect rightly
perhaps not one - but there was but one vote from the whole valley
that was not given in favor of the white basis, as the principle of
representation. And now what more do gentlemen ask for in relation
to that? We have fixed permanently in this Constitution, as a
fundamental principle, that the white population are to be the only
citizens. If they are willing with that in our Constitution to vote
themselves in, this objection becomes a very trifling one.

But, I might go a little further back in history. In 1832 a
strong effort was made, not only in Virginia but in Kentucky, to
pass a law of gradual emancipation; and it came within eight votes
of passing through the legislature of Virginia. Where was the
valley then? Sir, inasmuch as the majority of the votes at that
time were east of the Blue Ridge, almost every vote of the valley
must have been cast in favor of that project.

But, sir, beyond all this, natural causes are working there -
aye, sir, something that the word "natural" does not exactly reach:
Providential causes are at work; and gentlemen should be willing to
leave the result to Providence. To my mind, sir, there is nothing
in the existence of that per cent of slave population. It cannot
characterize the State one way or the other - after its character,
its pursuits, or its business. Agriculture it will be, it must be;
and it can be nothing else. It can never be devoted to cotton or
rice or sugar planting; and it must be an agricultural state; and
we all know that where agriculture is the main business, that
institution does not continue to flourish. Let it be, sir; it will
die naturally. By the very fact that slave labor is, not profitable
in an agricultural country, it will diminish faster that any human
laws can make it diminish. That is my view of the subject. And I
would call gentlemen to remember the remarks of Mr. Clay, when they
were speaking about dividing Texas into additional states. Western
Texas was to be divided into three or four states and objection was
made on that account. Mr. Clay, I think it was, told them
Providence had already settled that matter; and that those states
never could become slave-states.

Therefore, sir, if this objection is, as I view it, one that if
trifling in its character, that can affect nothing, as it stands,
and one that even if there is an evil in it is likely to cure
itself, and that very readily, I hope in consideration of the
numerous material interests that are involved in saving, as it
were, for ourselves this great highway between the East and West,
gentlemen will find their interests bound up with the bringing in
of those counties into our new State.

And, now, sir, to come back: while there may be a propriety in
the connection of the two sections, as the gentleman from Kanawha
shows, inasmuch as they lie when thus circumstanced between these
natural boundaries, yet, sir, this district becomes so extended
when you unite the two as to stretch from the extreme north to the
extreme southwest; and it is not to be readily supposed that there
has been that intercourse between the people of the two extremities
as to properly warrant us in connecting them in the same district.
My view in regard to these districts is that we bring those
together in each looking to their commercial relations, the
formation of the country, and the direction of the watercourses -
which last, I have already stated governs in everything. Looking to
all these things, we group together counties according to what we
suppose to be their commercial and business interests, those that
have a common commercial center - if they have any - and who may be
supposed to entertain nearly the same views and feelings with
reference to their junction with the new State. We offer, then,
sir, by the second resolution the counties of Craig, Giles, Bland,
Tazewell, Wise, Buchanan, Lee and Scott, the opportunity to come
in. They may accept or reject our offer; yet in either event we
have a tolerable boundary. I say I would offer it to them more on
their own account than from any particularly important benefit we
may derive from it. Nevertheless, I think it would improve the
boundary in that direction.

Well, sir, we offer it then to the other group - the counties
embracing the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad in their northern border,
and containing a population, in round numbers, of 86,000. We know
more in reference to their affairs. Last spring, we know, from more
than one of these counties delegates were sent here, and some were
thrown into prison and prevented from coming. Hardy and Hampshire
are represented here. Morgan had appointed delegates, but I do not
know whether they have got here. But other information we can get
all leads us to believe the Union feeling in these counties,
whether in the majority or not, is yet very strong, and that they
would probably choose to unite with us. Again, sir, when this
question, of a division of the state has been talked of as long as
I remember, the supposed line of division has always been the Blue
Ridge. People's thoughts have never been turned to any other
boundary, whenever a separation was spoken of. And now, sir, we
have changed properly, I have no doubt, the boundary laid down by
the ordinance of the convention authorizing this separation.
Perhaps it will do some injustice to some of the counties excluded
as well as to some that will be brought in. But people's minds have
not had time to ripen on that subject. We so stated - warned the
convention - in August, that there would not be time; that we were
proposing something new; that amid the excitement of war it was not
a proper time to take into consideration these things which affect
their civil interests. But, sir, we are here for the purpose of
doing something in reference to this matter. Those of us who
opposed action at that time were overruled; and we are here now to
carry out the behests of our constituents. But, now, sir, with an
uncertainty about what would be the wishes of the people contained
in these districts, seeing that if they should wish to join us it
would be proper they should - but with an uncertainty, I say, is it
not peculiarly proper - is it not peculiarly a duty which we owe
them on account of our former connections in fellow citizenship,
that we should at least offer to them - as I said in reference to
the counties in the more southern part, the opportunity to join us,
if they elect to do so? Sir, it can do no harm - it cannot affect
any interest - if they refuse to come with us. If they refuse to
take a vote even, it cannot.

And in reference to the difficulty about the legislature. I
understand they have a resolution before them to adjourn the
session in time to reassemble to take action upon the work of this
Convention. That, sir, is the common sentiment: they can meet
again, and will meet. And I do not suppose they wish this matter
should be hurried through indecorously. A constitution cannot be
made in a hurry; and when we pass from this boundary question, the
institutions we are about to incorporate in our Constitution should
be well canvassed and well debated here. I take great pleasure in
saying I have been pleased, consequently, with the debates we have
had. I have been instructed by them. The debates here have been,
without I believe an exception, to the question on all occasions.
There have been no speeches, that I heard, for "buncombe"; none
that seemed to be made merely for the sake of making a speech; but
every gentleman has addressed himself to the question: and, sir,
such debate cannot be unprofitable. This comparison of ideas, that
is what we are sent here for: to hear the views of each other and
deliberate upon them, and come to some conclusion in which we can
all coincide. It is not only I ourselves that will be instructed;
but information on these important subjects will be disseminated
throughout the country. The members will go from here enlightened -
as I confess I have been - and what they have thus gained will be
distributed among their constituents. When this new State comes
into existence under a Constitution thus made, our people, under
the blessing of Providence, will be prepared to accept these
provisions which shall have been adopted here, on the sincere
conviction that they are the best we could devise for the new
State. I trust therefore that not only this but all other questions
will be fully canvassed. I am certain the legislature will coincide
with us that this thing ought not to be hurried; and if it should
require them to return at a future day, I have no doubt every
member of that body will cheerfully do so.

I see nothing, sir, then in any of these objections. I see much
that calls upon us to go at least as far as I have indicated to
offer an opportunity to the districts of counties embraced in each
of the tables that are before us. Certainly, sir, we owe that much
to them. The very ignorance of their condition and of their views,
in connection with the fact that they have always been spoken of as
counties that would be likely to form a part of the new State,
together with the fact that we have intimations from many of them
that there are at least some people there who would be glad to
unite with us, demands at our hands that this opportunity should be
given to them.

THE PRESIDENT. The question is on the amendment of
gentleman from Kanawha.

MR. LAMB. Mr. President, I merely desire to make a remark
or two in explanation of the vote which I shall give in regard to
this second resolution.

I must confess I do not feel much interest in the question
whether that resolution is to be adopted or rejected; for whether
it be adopted or rejected, it seems to me under the terms of this
resolution you cannot have this territory connected with you, in
all probability. We propose to submit to the people in Giles, in
Craig, Tazewell and other counties the question of whether they
will become part of us upon a vote to be taken on the third
Thursday of April. Is there any probability, gentlemen, that at
that time you will be able to obtain a full and fair expression of
public sentiment on this subject there? Is there any probability
that within the time that is here enacted you can procure a vote of
the people of those counties ratifying your act and consenting to
become a part of West Virginia? It is now winter - not a proper
season for military operations. The vote in April will have to be
taken before the armies can be moved, or at least before they are
moving effectively. Nor is this a region of country, according to
my ideas and information, in which there will be any important
movement of armies for some time to come. But suppose it were the
case: suppose a short time before April our armies had moved in and
taken possession of the country: will the people of those counties
with the sentiments which we know they entertain, with the
prejudices which we know they are subject to, with the feelings
which we know have been prevalent in that region of country - will
they be prepared to come forward to the polls and say. We desire to
join the people of western Virginia?

I do not think, therefore, that this resolution presents a
practical question before this Convention; at least I fear not; for
I do not think, whether this resolution is adopted or rejected by
you, that you will have the people of those counties in the
situation contemplated by the resolution capable of declaring their
consent, within the time now fixed to become part of West
Virginia.

The objection, then, which I have to the resolution is not a
very important one, it is true; for I think it will lead to no
practical effect one way or the other; but I do not think it is
proper for this Convention, in this way to be soliciting time and
again as we have done, the people of adjoining counties to express
their sentiments and become part of the government which we propose
to institute. Whenever we can have a fair and full expression of
their sentiments on that subject, I would propose it to them. But
my plan, I must confess, in regard to this matter would be to leave
full power in the hands of the legislature of the new State to act
hereafter when circumstances may authorize their action - when the
fog is raised from the ground and you can see with some clearness
the prospect that lies before you.

My objection to this resolution is pretty much the same
objection to the action which was had by the convention in July. I
think it is premature. We then proposed to different counties to
take a vote in October. The convention was told that a full and
fair expression of popular sentiment upon the subject around our
borders at the time indicated was impossible. But they proposed it
then; and your action, if you propose it now will be premature as
was the action then.

THE PRESIDENT. The question was on the adoption of the
amendment.

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. Mr. President, I wish to say a few
words in reply to the gentleman last on the floor. Admitting now
the propriety of the admission of these counties, if they choose to
come in, he argues the impolicy of admitting them because they may
possibly not have an opportunity of voting. Now that may be all
true. Circumstances may be such when the vote comes to be taken
that they cannot vote. If that happens, then they are in no worse
position than he proposes to leave them in without the passage of
this resolution; but if the circumstances should be so changed that
they would have the privilege of voting, then, if we adopt this
resolution we shall have secured it to them. On one side every
chance is in our favor. On the other side, it may be possible there
may be a failure. Certainly if we do not adopt this resolution we
must fail in that respect - that is to bring them in. It seems to
me therefore that wisdom and prudence decidedly are in favor of
adopting the resolution and submitting the question to them; taking
the chances of their voting or not voting.

It is argued again that they will not have the opportunity of
voting; that because the enemy there is going into winter quarters,
there may be no advance of the army in time to afford them relief.
I might notice the remark of the gentleman from Hancock, that there
was nothing over to this little Tennessee border of such importance
as to require the advance of the Federal troops to remove the
forces there. Why, has the gentleman forgotten that the Cumberland
Gap is just at the tail of Lee and Scott and that this is the great
military turning point in the western States and that which the
Federal Government is making most gigantic efforts to secure, and
which the Confederate States have already occupied in advance? It
is now, sir, that we see the armies of the country gathering, like
the doves to their nests, in the State of Kentucky, preparatory to
an advance on this very spot, the great strategic military point in
the western states, that cuts the Lynchburg and Tennessee Railroad,
that great southern thoroughfare of trade and transportation,
directly in two - that completely cuts the Confederacy in two. Why,
sir, the very moment anything is done in the direction of
Cumberland Gap, this whole country about which we are talking is
relieved; and the same effect equally follows if General McClellan
advances on Manassas, if that great Confederate army is driven back
on Richmond and thence into North Carolina. That very moment this
whole valley is cleared from Winchester to the Cumberland Gap; and
every hostile force must immediately retreat or be hemmed in and
cut off by the army that is advancing. So that if you advance at
either point, if there is to be any forward movement by the armies
of the nation, by which you expect to put down this rebellion, it
will secure freedom to this people that they may vote and exercise
the right of suffrage that we are proposing to give them. It seems
to me, therefore, that the arguments here by the gentleman from
Hancock, are not well considered. But, sir, if these armies are to
meet with disaster; if instead of advancing on Richmond they are to
be driven back on Washington, and, as Letcher says in his message,
on the Susquehanna; if instead of taking the Cumberland Gap and
holding it you are to be driven back to the Ohio river and
Louisville is to be captured: then, indeed, I fear our whole State
will go by the board. I do not, however, contemplate any such a
state of facts, in submitting this Constitution to the people of
these counties.

But another objection of my friend from Hancock was his
opposition to this tier of counties embracing Craig, and Tazewell,
that seemed to be particularly offensive in his sight because there
were negroes there. I understand from his remarks that he had no
objection to the other tier of counties. That tier I understand he
is willing to admit - willing to submit the vote to this people, to
say whether they will join in this movement or not. Now, sir, if we
look at it on the score of negroes, in the first tier of counties
there are 4,813 slaves, and in the other which he is ready to admit
there are 12,831: nearly three times the number in the portion he
proposes to admit than in that which he proposes to exclude, upon
the ground, I understand, that they have negroes in them. A very
strange argument and conclusion, it seems to me, sir. Now, sir, I
confess I have no apprehension of these negroes in either district.
That much the larger majority is here or there does not affect me.
I have no apprehension for these few negroes anywhere in the
territory of West Virginia. As the gentleman from Wood has said,
the existence of eight per cent slave element in our white
population is nothing. West Virginia is a white country; and the
few slaves scattered within its borders cannot have any effect or
control. They never have had, as has been shown. In all the efforts
we have made to extend the white basis, these people have never
flinched. They have. stood shoulder to shoulder by Brooke and
Hancock; and it is only there that we find the only county in the
State of Virginia that has not within it a negro, free or
slave.

There is another consideration that strikes me, in addition to
those urged by the gentleman from Wood. There is East Tennessee, a
Union-loving and homogeneous people, precisely as our own all along
that Tennessee valley. If the Union is to be preserved their only
outlet to the Capital of the country is through that very valley.
They have struggled their resources until they have made the
Tennessee Railroad. There is but a small gap from where that turns
to the right through the Blue Ridge and comes down to Lynchburg to
connect them with the valley and give them a continuous line from
Tennessee to the Maryland line, with the Blue Ridge on one side and
this intermediate range of mountains that splits the valley in two
on the left.

Now, why should not these people look to their interests in the
extension of these internal improvements on to Richmond or Norfolk,
or to Baltimore, the great emporium for this whole country, where
they have been seeking an outlet but have never been able to obtain
it, because Richmond and Norfolk and the lower seaboard have ever
stood in their way, and will still stand in their way.

I believe now, sir, the people of the valley would vote against
a division of the state; yet when they find a division of the state
is a fixed fact and they have to choose which part they will join,
they will come over with us. It presents the question in a very
different light to their minds. They have all that natural
attachment to the state - for Virginians have ever regarded the
State of Virginia in the light of a nation; but they will vote on
it when you have settled the question by a vote of the people that
it is to be decided, and they have to decide for themselves which
part they will join. They will stand hereafter as they have ever
stood heretofore, with their brethren with whom they are allied in
interest and feeling. The question, then, is: shall we submit it to
their suffrages to say on this question what are their
preferences?

Another thing: in the county of Kanawha, I think the largest
number of the settlers are from the county of Russell, away down
there in the corner of the State next to Tennessee. They naturally
tend right down the New river valley. Why, then, shall we cut loose
from this tier of counties? All I ask is that the people of these
eleven counties shall have an opportunity to vote for themselves
whether they will cast their fortunes with us. I do not wish to
have them forced in here. That is all I ask and all I desire to
secure by this amendment; and it seems to me the opportunity to act
cannot with justice be denied by this Convention.

MR. LAMB. One word of explanation merely. The argument
which I addressed to the Convention was not an argument against the
object which the gentleman desires, at all. It was that the
resolutions which are now pending before the Convention will not
accomplish that object, in all probability; that the only
practicable method of accomplishing that object that I saw will be
put your new State in operation; put the legislature of the new
State in operation, and invest it with full authority to arrange
for acquiring new territory hereafter if it may be desirable. They
will have all the light which coming events will throw on that
question; they will act under different circumstances from those
upon which the Convention is now called upon to act.

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. Then, sir, I desire to know:
suppose the people desire to come, and supposing the new State is
ready to receive them, are we to obtain the consent of the old
state?

MR. LAMB. An explanation on that question would
necessarily lead me to occupy much more time than I had intended;
but I have no objection to explain my views on that question
also.

As soon as you have instituted your new State, whether the
rebellion will have been put down or not by that time, it may be
absolutely necessary for the Government of the United States - it
may be absolutely necessary, as a mere military question - that a
loyal government should be instituted in eastern Virginia: a loyal
government there representing the loyal citizens, the men who are
true to the Union - and we can recognize no other as the governing
power in either eastern or western Virginia; the Constitution and
the Government of the United States recognizes no other as the
governing power than the loyal people of the states - a loyal
government established there undoubtedly will be willing to make
any arrangement which may be proper. A loyal government originally
instituted would include these counties of Hampshire and Hardy
along the border - any of the counties in which a loyal element
prevails. They would include such counties as were protected by the
armies of the United States and in which the people would have an
opportunity of expressing their sentiments freely and independently
upon any question should they see proper. Then if they wish to join
us the matter may be fairly presented and can be fairly decided -
not by the parties on one side only - but by both parties. But
however this may be I must say the proposition in this resolution
will not lead to any practical results. It does not accomplish the
gentleman's objects, as well as I can see into what is to succeed;
for I do not think that there is any probability scarcely that by
April you would be able to obtain a vote of the people within those
counties to annex themselves to the new State. They have been set
in a particular direction. Their prejudices all lie in a particular
direction; and if these secession armies were all cleared out of
their territory this day, it would be months, perhaps longer,
before a proposition to annex themselves to this new State - if it
becomes a State - could even get a hearing among that people.

MR. WILLEY. I desire, sir, before the vote is taken upon
this question to make a simple statement of the ground which shall
influence me in casting it.

I accord entirely with the gentleman from Ohio who was last on
the floor, in his views of the utter impracticability of getting an
expression of the sense of this section - table B, I believe it is
- before or at the time prescribed in the resolution. I have no
idea, sir, that that section of the State will be relieved from the
presence of the Confederate military power by that time. The same
hindrances and influences which have prevented access to them
hitherto will remain until that time I have no doubt. And, sir, I
have as little doubt that if all these hindrances were removed and
they were at perfect liberty to go to the polls and express their
opinions - I have as little doubt that they would vote to stay out
by an overwhelming majority - as I have that they will not be
permitted to vote at all. Therefore, sir, what is the use of making
a proposition to them? If they are necessary to us, let us carry
out the principle adopted by this Convention and not ask them to
"come in, if you please," but say we have a right to take them in
whether they want to come in or not. If they are necessary let us
survey them off and include them in our farm. That is the principle
established by this Convention; and why not apply it to the people
of that section as well as to the people of another section?

But, then, sir, the crowning point I rose to mention was this:
if we propose to allow them to come in and they shall not have had
an opportunity to come in, and in the meantime we present a state
with boundaries including them to Congress asking for admission
into the Union, what will that body say? Will they not say: you
have acted prematurely? Will they say that you are pressing a
little state into the Union that does not contain the boundaries
that you by your previous action had enacted as the proper
boundaries for this State to include? Sir, I feel myself entirely
hampered in expressing my opinions on these questions, lest the
opinions I might express here might be quoted in judgment against
me in another body. But this I know - and I don't care whether the
reporter hears it or not - I would as soon he would not - this I do
know - I do not care about its going out of this body - I would
prefer it should not - that we are going to have difficulties
enough to encounter in Congress to get our State admitted without
giving them any other pretext for rejecting us than those that are
real and specific. Let it not be quoted as an objection to our
admission, that we are acting prematurely and desire to establish a
state which does not embrace the boundaries we believe to be
necessary for our convenience as a state; as it will be if we go to
Congress with our application before these people we propose to
extend the privilege to shall have had an opportunity of exercising
it. I would prefer seeing them left out entirely. If I believed
they wished to come in I would like to see them in; but, sir, you
have but to look at the map to see that they do not; for, sir, I
must differ with friends from Kanawha and Wood who previously
addressed the Convention in regard to the natural connections and
the identity of industrial interests and relations between that
section of the country and this State. Sir, look how far they lie
along and border this Tennessee railroad. Their interests and
connections lead them in the direction it leads; and, in my humble
estimation they will never desire to be taxed to make long lines of
improvements through mountain barriers to get to distant markets
when by short lateral works they can connect themselves with the
Tennessee railroad, with the seaboard and with all eastern Virginia
besides. I do not consider that their industry, mercantile
interests and social institutions are identified with ours at all.
In feeling they are adverse to us; and so far as my experience
goes, I know they are averse to all connection with us. I know that
members in the late convention at Richmond from these counties were
the bitterest persecutors of northern loyalty in all the State of
Virginia.

Therefore it is that I would rather see this measure left out of
the question altogether. It is true it would do no harm to allow
them to vote except it may be to embarrass our success in Congress
by giving an intimation to Congress that we are absolutely pressing
upon them a state which does not contain as much territory as we,
giving evidence by our course here deem proper to contain in the
new State. Therefore, upon the question of expediency, I shall be
compelled to vote against including the counties in table B.

MR. PAXTON. Mr. President, amongst the many reasons given
here by other gentlemen for the vote they expect to give on this
question, there are two - without recurring to the others many of
which have an influence over me - that of themselves are paramount
with me and either of which would influence my vote. I shall state
them very briefly. The first is that I believe - and I will not
detain the Convention to give my reason for that opinion - that the
adoption of the report of this committee will embarrass, retard,
and in all likelihood will defeat this whole new state project. For
that reason I shall vote against it.

THE PRESIDENT. The Chair would call the gentleman's
attention to the fact that the question will not be on the report
of the committee but on the amendment.

MR. PAXTON. Very well, sir; but I shall vote against the
amendment and the amended resolution, if the amendment prevails,
for one and the same reason.

The other reason is that I really do not desire to have these
counties connected with us in this new state movement, even though
they would express a disposition to come with us. I am sincerely
anxious for the success of this movement. I have been a new state
man from the beginning; and I think if we are to be successful,
that it is highly important we should have a State the counties and
people of which possess a unity of interest; a State within the
borders of which the people are homogeneous. I do not believe we
can have that, sir, by including these counties within our bounds.
I shall therefore vote against the amendment and against the
resolution itself when it comes up.

MR. STUART of Doddridge. Just one moment. I presume the
gentleman does not know the special amendment of the gentleman from
Kanawha is merely to include these counties in the first
resolution.

THE PRESIDENT. I think I understood the gentleman as
changing that.

MR. STUART of Doddridge. The object of the gentleman is
this: that if this Convention sees. cause to vote against the
resolution embracing the counties of Giles, Craig, etc., he will
feel compelled to vote against the other resolution, from the fact
that he does not think it would be doing justice to all sections of
country. I desire the Convention to understand that fact; that if
we vote against the amendment of the gentleman from Kanawha, and
the question comes up on the first resolution, upon giving these
counties of Giles, Craig, etc., an opportunity of expressing their
opinion, and the Convention in voting on that question votes
against giving them this opportunity, then the gentleman from
Kanawha, with his friends, will vote against the introduction of
the other class of counties. He wants to embrace them altogether,
so that we shall include all or reject all; but at the same time
permitting them to vote in sections. As the gentleman modified his
amendment to suit my views, I will vote for it; and I think those
favorable to this arrangement ought to do likewise, because it
gives us all or none.

Just one moment more. The gentleman from Monongalia objects to
giving this class of counties an opportunity of voting themselves
into the new State in any form because he thinks it will embarrass
the action of the new state men before Congress, and that we are
holding out inducements to make them believe we do not embrace the
boundaries we ought to have. We have now embraced the boundaries
which we undoubtedly should have; and for the sake of humanity we
offer these other sections of the country an opportunity to come in
if they want to. We say now, our future boundaries outside should
be influenced and controlled by the will and wish of the people
living outside; and if they want to come in, there should be the
boundary; and if they do not our boundary should be just as it is.
It certainly would not embarrass us.

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. One word in reply to the gentleman
from Monongalia. It is this: instead of these additional counties
jeopardizing the prospect of success in Congress, it seems to me,
if we look at the manifestations that have gone forth from
Washington, the larger the territory the more confidently may we
look for admission. We see in the -

MR. WILLEY. If the gentleman will allow me: I say if they
would come in, let them come; but I concur with the gentleman from
Ohio in the perfect impracticability of getting their vote. Hence
we would go to Congress after all without their territory; and it
would be construed against us.

MR. BROWN of Kanawha. If we do not go there with this
proposition to submit to them, we certainly will not get them. If
we give them an opportunity, it is certainly prejudging the case,
to say they will not vote.

But, as I was alluding to the fact, the administration has given
forth that West Virginia is naturally, and with their approbation
from the Blue Ridge to the Ohio river; and, therefore, when you
look at that fact in connection with our success in Congress, the
probabilities are highly in favor of our success by enlarging
rather than diminishing our territory. The only way you can enlarge
it is by giving these people the opportunity of adding their
counties to it.

MR. BATTELLE. I was going to say simply that that is just
what struck my mind - the inquiry made by the gentleman from
Monongalia: if the principle acted on already is a correct one, and
we have a right to go around and take what we please, why do not we
do it at once? Why this difference in the second and third
resolution? Why distinct from the first? Why have one principle in
one case and another in another? If we have the power, as seems to
have been argued all day on Saturday - and which was established as
a principle by the action of the Convention, as I understand it -
why not practice upon it now? If we have got the power, why not
leave this matter with the body with whom the Constitution of the
United States, the authoritative source of power in this case, at
least, leaves it - the legislature of the state and the Congress of
the United States? And that brings me to this point to which my own
mind has been settling down, in spite of the views of some
gentlemen here whose opinions I have been accustomed to regard with
very great deference, to the conviction that we have been engaged
these six days on a question which we have not legitimately before
us, which the people did not send us here to settle, and which we
have no power to settle because the Constitution of the United
States - the authority in the case - expressly declares that that
power of regulating boundary is with the legislature of the state
and the Congress of the United States.

These are my views, sir, in reference to that matter; that any
action we can take here, we all agree, must be merely
recommendatory. It is, in truth, a departure from the intent of
those who sent us here - who sent us here to make a Constitution
for the counties embraced in the ordinance for division upon which
they voted; but of course with a proviso that where there were
counties outside of the line whose action had been so clear and
well defined as to make no dispute they should come in. Yet the
question of boundary, as a distinct question, was no part of the
purpose for which we here assembled; and I am more and more of
opinion that we are embarrassing the new state movement. We
embarrass the creation of a new State; and I am just as clear that
we will embarrass the new State after it is created. Some gentlemen
tell us here they want no distracting element introduced into our
deliberations. Do they reflect that they themselves, all
unwittingly it may be - and I will give them credit for so acting -
are by pressing this measure, introducing an inevitable element of
distraction.

But there is another remark I wish to make not bearing
particularly on the amendment. I am following the course pursued by
every one who has spoken. It strikes me that these resolutions, by
the condition they contain - though I wish particularly to say not
I believe so intended - do contain a delusion and a snare. They
tell us: "provided a majority of the votes cast within the said
district * * * are in favor of the adoption of the Constitution,"
and so on. Well, now, it is perfectly obvious to every gentleman
that in reference to the second resolution, or in reference to the
third - or, if the gentleman's amendment obtains, in reference to
all of them - it is perfectly competent for one hundred men in
these twenty counties to decide this whole question. What is easier
than, if a poll be opened, for a few dozen to go to one poll and
vote; and in the absence of any other voters they decide the whole
question. A few dozen may go to another poll, in the same way; and
so on throughout the whole district. And that, it seems very likely
to me, might be the case, sir. I cannot say of course that it is
likely one hundred men might decide it; but still it is possible.
What is the state of the fact? The secessionists within these
bounds - and, by the way, notwithstanding all the declarations to
the contrary by the gentleman from Kanawha, yet in this secession
business they have been to a man against us - except away down
there on the railroad: I believe all the delegates from the valley
and, sir, all these counties voted for secession, and their people
since then have been and today are for secession.

But as I was going on to say, you may tender to these
secessionists an opportunity to vote, but what will be their
answer? They will not recognize your government, as my colleague
says, for they call it a "bogus government." They will not
recognize it by voting. Suppose the State of Ohio should give the
people of Ohio and Marshall counties an opportunity of voting
whether they would go into Ohio or not - I should not go to the
polls at all. I would not recognize the validity of the act even by
going to the polls to vote against it. Well, now, the whole history
of this case shows that these secessionists feel just that way in
reference to your new state movement. They will not vote at all.
What is the result? Why a few Union men - patriots though they may
be and may have been - suffering Union men though they may be - and
you may say every other good thing of them you please and I will
endorse it - the trouble is there cannot be enough of them - but it
is possible, I repeat that one hundred in this whole district may
decide this whole question.

Am I not right, then, in saying that this condition, plausible
as it appears - and I again especially disclaim any imputations on
gentlemen - is a delusion and snare? I beseech you, gentlemen,
trust not to it!

I expect to vote against the amendment of the gentleman from
Kanawha. I shall then vote for the amendment suggested by the
gentleman from Taylor, if it is proposed, instead of "votes cast"
insert "qualified voters," or something equivalent to it, with the
desire to make the proposition as acceptable to myself as possible
with the expectation, however, of voting against the whole business
(Laughter); for I do not want those people in.

MR. POMEROY. I would suggest, the gentleman from Kanawha
certainly misunderstood me. I did not indicate how I would vote. I
did indicate very clearly that I would vote against putting the two
together so that they had to stand or fall together. I indicated
that clearly; but that was what I wished to convey: that I did not
wish to group them together, to unite them; and I am really
astonished at my friend from Doddridge taking the view he now does
that there is an important point to be gained by putting them
together. The two stand on entirely different bases, I think; and
therefore while I did not indicate that I should vote for either of
the districts without some amendments, I wanted it to be understood
that I was opposed to bringing both districts in together. And I do
hope the Convention will now, before we adjourn, take the vote upon
this, as the whole merits of the question will come up, after this
is voted on, upon the motion to adopt section B.